Talk:2017 NHL entry draft

Early Editing

Please note that any edits made to this article prior to the conclusion of the 2015 Stanley Cup Finals will be reverted, even if the information being added is correct. Deadman137 (talk) 20:31, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Possible compensatory draft picks

All NCAA players from the first-round of the 2012 draft have signed their entry-level deals. So baring any fatalities or European drafted players from the first-round of 2015 coming over to North America to play Major Junior hockey, there are currently no potential compensatory picks for this draft. Deadman137 (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Staff compensation

Teams that are required to give up draft picks are allowed to give up picks in the same round from other teams, provided those picks are higher than the hiring team's own selection. Deadman137 (talk) 02:43, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Leafs will keep their 2016 third round pick which means that their 2017 third round pick belongs to Detroit and their 2018 third round pick belongs to New Jersey [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.101.91.86 (talk) 15:07, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm well aware of that article, however Toronto could still do something that can satisfy the conditions at this year's draft, similar to what Edmonton did last year. The best course of action is to probably wait until the conclusion of this year's draft (as it's only three weeks away) and if there are no trades between Toronto and Detroit/New Jersey involving third-round picks then we should add this to the article. Of course if either of the Red Wings or Devils were to trade one of the two picks in question over the next three weeks then we would have more than enough evidence to support this claim.

Basically this will be solved by the 25th of this month one way or the other. Deadman137 (talk) 16:17, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

According to this tweet, San Jose's third round pick (#81) will go to New Jersey as compensation for hiring Peter DeBoer. I haven't seen it reported elsewhere, so I'm not sure if it's correct. Ho-ju-96 (talk) 16:37, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

For now we don't need to do anything unless we can find a more reliable source. If it turns out to be right though we'll know when the league releases the complete draft list sometime after the season ends next month. Deadman137 (talk) 21:14, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Las Vegas

At this time the expansion team will have picks 34, 65, 96, 127, 158 and 189, unless there are any compensatory second-round picks in this draft. Should there be any compensatory picks then all third-round and later picks will drop by the corresponding number of the amount of compensatory selections awarded. Deadman137 (talk) 23:29, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Order of remaining playoff teams

Here is this year's order of remaining playoff teams.

Conference finalists will be given the final four selections in this year's draft. As teams get eliminated from the playoffs please only add teams that have their selection spot determined.

The following is a list in reverse order of league finish for this year's playoff teams:

• Nashville Predators
• Calgary Flames
• Toronto Maple Leafs
• Boston Bruins
• Ottawa Senators
• San Jose Sharks
• St. Louis Blues
• New York Rangers
• Edmonton Oilers
• Minnesota Wild
• Columbus Blue Jackets
• Pittsburgh Penguins
• Montreal Canadiens
• Anaheim Ducks
• Chicago Blackhawks
• Washington Capitals

Ex: If the Predators or Capitals were to be eliminated in the first two rounds they would pick 16th and 27th respectively. If the Predators were to make the conference finals and Calgary was eliminated in the opening two rounds then the Flames would pick 16th. If the Capitals were to make the conference finals and the Blackhawks lost in either of the first two rounds then Chicago would select 27th. Deadman137 (talk) 04:36, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Why isn't it Conference Quarters 16-24, Conference Semis 25-28, Conference Finals 29-30, Winner 31? Why does Washington go to 27th regardless of which round eliminated? LordAtlas (talk) 05:17, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

The 12 teams eliminated in the first two rounds go in reverse order of non-division winners based on regular season points, then any division winners that get eliminated in the opening two rounds. Please actually read what is written before commenting, it's starting to become an issue and it is making it more difficult to work with you. Deadman137 (talk) 05:27, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for assuming bad faith. If it was so simple you wouldn't have needed to give such a long winded example. You could have written why those teams get the specific slot. LordAtlas (talk) 06:02, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Order selection

In previous years the order selection was inserted onto the page after the draft lottery for non-playoff teams for all seven rounds. Why do we not see it this year yet? Thank you. Gtufte27 (talk) 00:39, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Round 7 but no round 6?

Why is there a list of round 7 picks when there is no record of round 6? 86.163.168.120 (talk) 19:51, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

It all depends on who is doing the editing. As long as everything gets entered correctly, the order that it gets added is not important. Plus the sixth-round is up now. Deadman137 (talk) 21:29, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Redlink

[2] @Kaiser matias, the point of a redlink is that an article needs to be created for a likely notable topic. But when a discussion specifically states that an article is not warranted... the redlinks are removed. The text can remain, of course, but it shouldn't be linked as if it's awaiting an article. This should be uncontroversial. (not watching, please {{ping}}) czar 13:46, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

@Czar: Given how young all of these players are there is no harm in leaving most of them with red links, as they should also all already be setup to avoid any potential disambiguation issues in the future. This is article makes sure to be as diligent as we can be to try and prevent issues around WP:BLP. Deadman137 (talk) 14:49, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

It signals a mixed message to viewers and editors—look at all these articles that need creation—rather than acknowledging that many (most?) of the lower-round picks will never warrant a separate article. (2014 NHL Entry Draft, 2006 NHL Entry Draft) It's trivial to add a blue link when needed or to comment out the proper disambiguation. Most diligent, I'd wager, would be avoiding the harm stemming from the reams of unnecessary creations listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Ice hockey. I won't belabor it, but I think it's at least worth a discussion with the community who maintains these articles, if what you describe is your policy czar 15:09, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

I agree with your point that these shouldn't sit around indefinitely. We probably should come up with a timeline for how long to keep the red links.

We certainly have had issues with unnecessary creations, but based on my experience most of those articles are usually about people who were never drafted by NHL teams. I'm not saying that it doesn't happen but we have been working to reign in our criteria required for an article. Deadman137 (talk) 03:26, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Hischier draft.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot (talk) 01:52, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:NHL Entry Draft which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 01:05, 14 April 2024 (UTC)