The Puck Stops Here
Next entry: Here Come The Penguins
Previous entry: Anaheim Will Likely Miss The Playoffs
Rangers Compensatory Draft Pick For Cherepanov
by PuckStopsHere on 03/12/09 at 12:59 AM ET
Comments (7)
One under-reported decision that comes out of the GM meetings (although Mike Chen is reporting this) is the NHL’s decision to give a compensatory draft pick to the New York Rangers for the death of Alexei Cherepanov.
Cherepanov was drafted by the New York Rangers in the first round of the 2007 entry draft. He was selected 17th overall. Earlier this season he died, while playing a game in the KHL. The Rangers never had a chance to sign him. When a team fails to sign a first round draft pick the CBA gives them a compensatory draft pick. If the pick was 17th overall in the first round, the compensatory pick will be the 17th selection in the second round. Since Cherepanov died, the Rangers will not sign him. Therefore the Rangers are getting a compensatory draft pick. The New York Rangers will have the 17th selection in the second round.
The NHL used to give out compensatory picks for teams that lost more unrestricted free agents than they signed (and this led to teams trading for pending free agents just before free agency began in order to get a compensatory pick that would be unavailable to their current team). That practise is no longer done. Last year, the only compensatory pick was given to Phoenix because they had been unable to sign Blake Wheeler (who is now playing with the Boston Bruins). Since Wheeler had been the fifth pick in the 2004 draft, Phoenix was awarded the fifth pick in the second round (35th overall). This pick was traded to Anaheim who selected Nicolas Deschamps.
The problem with compensatory draft picks is that everyone suffers as a result of them. Phoenix was given an extra pick at 35th overall and every pick after that point was suddenly one position later than it should have been. Why should my team have to pick one position later because Phoenix couldn’t sign Wheeler or because Cherepanov died? It makes no sense for my team to have worse draft picks because of this.
I am sure that it happens that the player a team wanted to select was chosen in the pick immediately before them (a pick that would have been their own had there not been a compensatory draft pick). That seems to happen to me at least once per fantasy sports draft I am in - so I am sure it happens in the NHL as well. These compensatory draft picks do hurt the other teams in the league. In order to compensate a team all the other teams give something up with later draft picks. I don’t think there should be any compensatory draft picks.
The NHL entry draft is inherently risky. If you draft a player he might not develop, he might not want to sign with your team and as is the case of Alexei Cherepanov, he might die. That is life. That risk exists for everyone. Should your pick be the unlucky one, that is too bad. You took a chance and lost.
As the rule stands right now, the Rangers are getting a compensatory pick for Cherepanov only because they did not sign him. Had they signed him last summer and he decided to play one more year in Europe before coming to the NHL and died in exactly the same way, there would be no compensatory draft pick at all. Does that make sense? It is an awfully strange distinction for a compensatory pick. If a player dies before you sign him, then you get one, but if he signs and then dies you don’t. That seems to be the way the rules should be interpreted from how they are written (and from this precedent).
I don’t like compensatory picks. Why should everyone in the league have their picks moved backwards because a team could not sign a former first round pick? A compensatory pick punishes each team in the league a little bit to reward a team that had been unlucky. I don’t think the NHL should offer compensatory picks to anyone. Unfortunately, the New York Rangers will have one this year since Alexei Cherepanov died while unsigned.
Filed in: | The Puck Stops Here | Permalink
Tags: Alexei+Cherepanov, Blake+Wheeler, New+York+Rangers,
Comments
Wow. This is poorly written. He repeats the same paragraph over and over again, but just rewords it.
Not uncommon in this blog.The author has apparently never heard that good writing is complex ideas expressed simply, not the other way around.
Posted by shep on 03/12/09 at 01:56 AM ET
lol
Your just noticing this now? and you are just realizing this now? and you just found this out now?i really hope so , because this has happend for a long time.
Posted by Luongo-is-my-hero on 03/12/09 at 03:32 AM ET
Teams only get one first round pick a year, and that first round pick is by far their most valuable pick. Losing that pick, even just once, is a significant blow to a team, so compensatory picks are intended to help the competitive balance in the league. These picks also mitigate some of the risk involved in the draft, letting teams more confidently pick higher-risk players, like Europeans, in the first round. This contributes to a higher level of play in the NHL.
It’s only “unfair” after the fact, after a team fails to sign their first round pick. Before that happens, it protects every team equally. The real winner from a compensatory pick is the team, if any, that eventually signs the player involved. You can make a case that team should give up their second round pick to the original drafting team, but there are too many situations where that wouldn’t make any sense, and it’d potentially keep NHL-calibre talent out of the league.
Posted by Ryan from Toronto on 03/12/09 at 06:06 AM ET
Losing a player is a significant blow to a team. Vancouver has Luc Bourdon die and got nothing in return. The Rangers would have got nothing for Cherepanov, if only they had signed him before he died (which is a pretty odd situation). Players can have injuries that end careers or significantly reduce their effectiveness. Why is it only with first rounders that compensation exists - and that compensation hurts the entire rest of the league?
Life is a gamble. Draft picks are gambles. Sometimes they don’t work out. Deal with it.
I don’t see that the lack of compensatory picks would in any way reduce the talent level of the NHL. That seems like empty speculation. If a player is not going to be picked in the first round because he is a risk, I don’t imagine I would pick him earlier because of a potential compensatory pick. I would pick the player who belongs in the first round instead. The risky player would still be selected. The draft has six more rounds after the first without compensatory picks. The player would still come to the NHL if he is good enough. The argument that somehow compensatory picks improve the quality of the NHL talent pool is an empty one.
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 03/12/09 at 06:25 AM ET
The problem with compensatory draft picks is that everyone suffers as a result of them. Phoenix was given an extra pick at 35th overall and every pick after that point was suddenly one position later than it should have been. Why should my team have to pick one position later because Phoenix couldn’t sign Wheeler or because Cherepanov died? It makes no sense for my team to have worse draft picks because of this.
As I posted on Mike’s post, I completely agree with this. This is another example of the NHL rewarding teams that are mediocre, or outright bad. Can’t sign a first round pick? Don’t have the money? Don’t have an organization that the player has any interest in playing for? Who’s fault is that? It sure as hell isn’t the fault of the other 29 teams in the league, so why punish them by pushing their second/third round picks all back by a spot?
If anything, I have much more sympathy for a team getting a compensatory pick for a career-ending injury than any other scenario. At least in that case it’s completely out of the team’s control. But there’s no excuse for being unable to sign your own draft picks. The only reasons for that are that you don’t have the money, can’t meet the player’s needs, or don’t want the player any more… none of which are reasons that deserve being rewarded.
It’s only “unfair” after the fact, after a team fails to sign their first round pick. Before that happens, it protects every team equally. The real winner from a compensatory pick is the team, if any, that eventually signs the player involved. You can make a case that team should give up their second round pick to the original drafting team, but there are too many situations where that wouldn’t make any sense, and it’d potentially keep NHL-calibre talent out of the league.
Theoretically, yes, it protects all teams equally. But practically? Not a chance. Practically, this rule is going to protect crappy organizations more than good ones. The good organizations don’t have issues getting their top picks signed because they a) manage their budgets and rosters correctly, and make sure they have the cash necessary to handle their first round picks; b) are good organizations… yes, it perpetuates the cycle, but if you’ve built a club that wins, treats players well, and is an attractive place to play, you should not be punished, that’s just lunacy.
The bad organizations, like Phoenix (sorry Coyotes fans… this is not an insult to the fans…), are going to lose players occasionally, because let’s face it, why would Blake Wheeler want to play for them? They haven’t won anything. Haven’t been in the playoffs in years. Have shown little signs of improving. And clearly have a beyond tenuous financial situation. Oh, and the ice sucks pretty much year round, the fan base that’s there might be great, but it is much smaller than at least half the teams in the league, and you have to listen to the Great One as your coach, which I imagine is next to impossible when you’re a kid that probably grew up in awe of his ability.
Wheeler didn’t sign and get tied up in that messed up situation, and for that I cannot blame him. He went to college (always a good decision), had moderate success at that level, and ended up signing in Boston—a club with a decent coach, large fan base, a dedicated owner (even if Jacobs is a cancer on the league, IMO), and some cash.
Posted by Nathan from the scoresheet! on 03/12/09 at 07:50 AM ET
Phoenix was given an extra pick at 35th overall and every pick after that point was suddenly one position later than it should have been. Why should my team have to pick one position later because Phoenix couldn’t sign Wheeler or because Cherepanov died? It makes no sense for my team to have worse draft picks because of this.
Posted by Miami airport transportation on 07/22/09 at 11:37 AM ET
Add a Comment
Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.
Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.
Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
Most Recent Blog Posts
Missing Other League All Star Games
Top Defenceman So Far This Season
About The Puck Stops Here
The Puck Stops Here was founded during the 2004/05 lockout as a place to rant about hockey. The original site contains over 1000 posts, some of which were also published on FoxSports.com.
Who am I?
A diehard hockey fan.
Why am I blogging?
I want to.
Why are you reading it?
???
Email: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
When learning from experts it’s best to learn personally from them, or from their blog. We can provide that with poker lessons blog, your home to learn poker personally.
Do you get shocked from the luck in the game of poker? Stop getting shocked and start being a Poker Shoker
Donate to Kukla’s Korner
Wow. This is poorly written. He repeats the same paragraph over and over again, but just rewords it.
Posted by Cherepanov on 03/12/09 at 01:42 AM ET