Talk:2011 NHL entry draft

On 14 April 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from 2011 NHL Entry Draft to 2011 NHL entry draft. The result of the discussion was moved.

Re-ordering

I re-ordered by the date pick was traded to its new team. That's all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.39.32.81 (talk) 20:15, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. Alphabetic order should be preferred in this case, since a) the order of the draft, which would usally be the sorting key, is not established until the very last game of the Stanley Cup Finals and b) a sorting by date just makes looking up any traded picks more difficult than necessary.

By the way, the two picks traded to Philadelphia you have added in are NOT with the club. The pick from the Pronger trade was rumored to be contingent on the club winning the cup in 2010 (there was never given any explanation on the condition, which is why the pick itself stays out); the Hamhuis pick was not to be switched if Philadelphia traded away the rights before the deadline (see here, end of second paragraph), which happened just a few days later. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 20:29, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, usually we keep the trades listed alphabetical until the end of the regular season. At that point we switch to draft order (with the playoff teams ordered as a best guess by seedings and updated as theirs slots solidify). Dates that the trades happen really don't mean anything. ccwaters (talk) 21:12, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oleksiak

Should Jamie Oleksiak be Canadian/American since he has dual citizenship? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.188.227 (talk) 01:19, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Landeskog

If Gabriel Landeskog is Swedish, then why is he listed under "North American Skaters"? And there's a Swedish flag next to his name. So what's up here? 207.6.61.114 (talk) 21:03, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"North American" and "European" in this context refers to the league a player competes in before he gets drafted. Since Landeskog plays for the Kitchener Rangers, he is listed under "North American". Hope that helps. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 21:09, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Link to 2012

I'm looking at the infobox to determine why there's no link to 2012, and I don't see anything jumping out at me. Any ideas? ccwaters (talk) 21:27, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect something further down on the page to cause the disruption since Template:Infobox NHL Draft is displayed correctly. Perhaps some unclosed div-tag or similar stuff? *will do some testing* --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 21:55, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hm... actually, the error really is in the template, wouldn't have thought that... I'll try to fix it, but no promises... --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 22:19, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Issue ressolved. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 22:35, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NJ's forfeited pick

As a punishment for the Kovalchuk deal, NJ will have to forfeit a 1st round pick within the next 3 drafts. Its NJ's decision on which draft they will forfeit. Do any one know when they have to declare their decision for this year? Will it be when the order is decided, before the draft begins, or right up to when they are on the clock? Just curious as it may be a pain to reorder the picks on this page. ccwaters (talk) 17:29, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. Its the day after the SCF end per http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/nhl/news/story?id=5569258 ccwaters (talk) 17:33, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of the Devils' forfeitures, I think we are putting the numbering out of alignment with how the table currently is set. The Devils third pick should, and will, have no number, the Hawks will pick 69th, the Wild 70th, etc. We should renumber each entry after that lost pick. Reso lute 14:37, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Based off of the handling of TML's forfeited pick in 2009 NHL Entry Draft, the number is still retained. [1] TerminalPreppie (talk) 15:23, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, thanks. Reso lute 16:41, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am assuming NJ decided to keep this pick, but did anyone see anything official? TerminalPreppie (talk) 12:27, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Conditional pick in Langenbrunner trade

The conditions of said pick are relatively precise, thanks to the very good official source: New Jersey will get Dallas' second-round pick in 2011 if Langenbrunner is re-signed by the Stars prior to the Draft; if he is re-signed after the Draft and prior to the 2011–12 season, New Jersey will get Dallas' 2012 second-rounder, with New Jersey's third-round choice of the same year going the opposite way.

However, can anybody confirm the validity of the statement that if Langenbrunner is not re-signed by Dallas for 2011–12 at all, New Jersey will receive Dallas' third-round pick in 2011? That would sound pretty impossible to me to determine since the 2011 Draft would have taken place well before the actual fact (Langenbrunner not being re-signed) could be established. Could it be that for this case the respective pick in the 2012 Draft will change hands and that the statement in the source simply contains a typo? --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 09:37, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps not phrased clearly enough, but I feel that there's a possibility it's not a typo. Here's my interpretation: If Langenbrunner is re-signed by Dallas before the 2011 draft, New Jersey gets Dallas' 2011 second round pick (see 1). If Langenbrunner is not re-signed by Dallas by the time of the 2011 draft (this phrase isn't in the source and that's why the conditions are confusing), New Jersey gets Dallas' 2011 third round pick (see 2). If Langenbrunner is re-signed by Dallas after the 2011 draft, the Devils gets Dallas' 2012 second round pick and Dallas gets the Devils' 2012 third round pick (see 3). From the article on nhl.com, relevant sections bolded:

(1) The conditional pick the Devils will receive from Dallas will be a second-rounder in 2011 should the Stars win a round in the playoffs this season and/or re-sign Langenbrunner before the 2011 Entry Draft. (3) If the Stars re-sign Langenbrunner after the 2011 Entry Draft and New Jersey has not already received Dallas' 2011 second-round pick, the Devils and Dallas will swap second- and third-round picks in 2012, with the Devils moving up a round.

(2) If Dallas does not win a round in the playoffs this season and does not re-sign Langenbrunner for the 2011-12 season than the Devils will receive Dallas' third-round pick in 2011.

Does that clear anything up or just confuse things further? Ho-ju-96 (talk) 09:57, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Probably easier to understand as follows: If Langenbrunner is re-signed before the 2011 Draft (or Dallas win a round in the playoffs - not met), Devils will get a 2nd round pick from Dallas; otherwise Devils will get a 3rd round pick instead. If, however, Langenbrenner is re-signed for 2011-12 after the 2011 Draft, then Devils will get Dallas' 2nd-round pick in the 2012 Draft for its 3rd-round pick for the 2012 Draft. That's probably a better way of putting it...? - Penwhale | ^{dance in the air and follow his steps} 06:18, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... Things finally clear up; it seems as if the Langenbrunner trade has a 2011 pick (either 2nd- or 3rd-round) guaranteedly going to New Jersey, contingent on the re-signing (which seems not to be very likely at this point), plus an additional 2012 pick if the re-signing happens after the draft. At least that's what it should be like if you take a look at both the Dallas and New Jersey draft pages. If no one objects, I will alter both the 2011 and 2012 articles accordingly. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 17:40, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nashville's 7th

I believe the Flyers have Nashville's 7th (202) as part of the Parent/Hamhuis trade. Can anyone verify? TerminalPreppie (talk) 12:49, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See this earlier revision or alternatively this source for more info – the pick was conditional, and not going to be transferred if Hamhuis' rights were traded to another team prior to July 1, 2010. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 13:24, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

30 picks per round

It is wrong to assume that that 2nd round will have 31 picks. The default (and most expected and obvious result) is that there will be 30 picks in each round, with the exceptions (i.e., 3rd round with 29 picks) to be referenced with a verifiable source. Please show me a source that states there will be 31 picks in the 2nd round. If there is no source, then picks should be properly numbered to 30 picks per round. Dolovis (talk) 18:30, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can't think of a time since the new rule for draft pick compensation went into effect where there wasn't 31 picks (other than last year). I am sure there was. But its clearly more often the case that there are 31 picks than when there are not. Either way its really easy to tell if there will be 31. Check if all the first round picks from 2 years ago have signed a contract with their respective teams. If all of them have then there will only be 30 picks. If they haven't then there will be 31 or more. -DJSasso (talk) 18:36, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There already is. If you had read the notes, you would have seen note 8 for the second round pick that the Islanders acquired from Montreal. A pick that is compensation for failing to sign a free agent. Reso lute 18:39, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) Other than last year I had to go all the way back to 1996 to see a draft that didn't have a compensatory pick in the 2nd round. And as Resolute points out there already is a note mentioning that there is a compensatory pick for the Islanders. -DJSasso (talk) 18:42, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dolovis: in addition to the references that have been present in the article, the procedure for compensatory picks is detailed in 8.3(a-b) in the current CBA. TerminalPreppie (talk) 19:38, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Totally agree with DJSasso, Resolute and TerminalPreppie. Besides, no need to source each entry of the Round 1 picks... it's kinda pointless somehow... --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 19:47, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Compensatory Pick

So right now the Flames haven't signed Tim Erixon yet. If they fail to do so they will receive a compensatory pick as he was given a bona-fide offer. He was drafted 23rd overall so the Flames should get the 23rd pick of the 2nd round. However, Montreal also has a compensatory pick at #50 so would the Flames get their compensatory 23rd pick by counting Montreal's or not? Basically would Calgary get a 53rd overall pick or 54th? One95 (talk) 08:26, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fischer was drafted in 2006 and has not been signed by Montreal until August 2010; Montreal hence got a compensation pick for 2011. If we apply this scheme to the case you described above, Calgary would not receive a pick until four years without Erixon being signed have passed. In other words: If Erixon is not signed until August 15, 2013, Calgary will receive a compensation pick in 2014. They will definitely not get one for this year. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 08:39, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fischer was different because he was a NCAA player. They have up until the summer after they leave college/university. Erixon is not a NCAA player so it's only two years since he received a bona-fide offer. It's in section 8.6(a). One95 (talk) 13:38, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that changes things only a little. The compensation pick would then very likely be awarded for the 2012 draft, assuming that the August 15 deadline of a respective year still holds. By the way – do you have a link to the regulations available? I couldn't find anything somehow... --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 13:58, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The deadline is June 1 as I mentioned, so the compensatory pick would be for this year's draft. CBA link/info is here - http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26366 One95 (talk) 14:11, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, you did not mention that June 1 deadline (5:00 pm EDT, to be exact), otherwise I would not have assumed August 15. ;-) Anyway, thanks for the link. Well... either I have read something over, or the CBA does not mention anything about the draft order when more than one pick is being inserted into a round. My vague guess would be that Calgary will receive #53 then, since the draft order is theoretically not final until the last Stanley Cup game has been concluded; nevertheless, it would certainly be the best to wait with any changes until a formal announcement has been made by the league in order to avoid any sourcing/crystal balling issues. --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 14:28, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, that was someone else I was talking to that I mentioned it. One95 (talk) 14:34, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So far for Calgary getting a compensatory pick. Although... technically spoken, they have gotten two for one player... xD --Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 21:31, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Three-for-one, actually, as Calgary also got a live body, having only to give up a 5th round lottery ticket. As to the original question, based on the CBA, Calgary would have gotten the 53rd pick if Erixon went back into the draft. The language says it is the same pick in the 2nd round as the lost player in the first. So Montreal got the 20th pick in the 2nd round (#50), and Calgary would have gotten the 23rd (#53). Reso lute 15:15, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

conditional pick between ANA and NYI in Wisniewski trade

While we are at it, has anybody any information on which third-round pick the Islanders eventually shipped to Anaheim? The condition in the Wisniewski trade said that they had to determine the pick to part with (either their own or Colorado's) until June 1. Well, the deadline has passed now, but there is nothing to find on either the Ducks', Islanders' or Avalanche's websites. Is there something to be found in the zillions of New York- or Los Angeles-based media outlets on the (albeit minor) issue?--Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 13:10, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to the SBNation Islander Blog here, the one that was sent was the 65th pick. - Penwhale | ^{dance in the air and follow his steps} 06:38, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is also confirmed by this NY Islanders official website page.--Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 18:26, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thrashers name should stay, till approval

People are changing the Thrashers name before approval, request a lock. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.97.182.80 (talk) 18:36, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nice, comprehensive work

I just want to extend thanks to those who took the laboring oar with respect to this page. There's lots of information, especially regarding conditional picks and trades. This is much more comprehensive that what I had anticipated. Nice work. GeeZee (talk) 17:06, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Official draft order released, only two inconsistencies...

Now that the official order of selection has been released, it is pretty astonishing that we only have two inconsistencies in it. Naturally, I would like to get these ironed out before the draft, so if anybody can help, feel free to do so. The inconsistencies are:

Round 3 – Pick #84 has been traded from Pittsburgh to Philadelphia in the second trade involving the negotiation rights for Dan Hamhuis last year. So far, so good; however, said pick is listed as "conditionally to Phoenix" in the source above. My assumption would be that it has something to do with the Bryzgalov trade earlier this month, since this is the only trade Philadelphia and Phoenix have done together since the time of the Hamhuis trade; however, the sources repeatedly state that "a 3rd-round pick in 2012 and future considerations" were included in the deal. Conclusively, there must be an error somewhere, either in the official selection order or in the reports about the trade; can anybody help and bring some light into this "mystery"?

Round 4 – Pick #119 originally looked to be involved in a trade between San Jose and Anaheim after a trade in 2009, but after checking the official order AND both of the website of the teams involved, this does not seem to be the case at all. Honestly, I expected this, given the plethora of conditions said trade had at the time, however, it nevertheless seems a little weird. So if someone knows why the fourth-round pick was not traded at all, please chip in.

Thanks in advance, Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 21:06, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Update on the #84 pick: The condition indeed has to do with the Bryzgalov trade, see here. However, this opens up the question what happens to the 2012 pick if the condition is converted... ––Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 21:30, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's awesome (minus the flyers losing another pick anyways). Good job to everyone involved. TerminalPreppie (talk) 00:59, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Winnipeg

They have officially been named the Jets, so why keep changing it to Winnipeg NHL team? See: http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=567080&navid=mod-rr-headlines — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.104.242.180 (talk) 00:20, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tobias Rieder is german not danish!

--217.209.200.88 (talk) 18:12, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, why is Xavier Oullet registered as of French nationality in the draftlist, but as of Canadian origin in the nationality list? (And I guess there are more inconsistencies when it comes to American/Canadian duals) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quartus486 (talk • contribs) 16:06, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on 2011 NHL Entry Draft. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nhl.com/ice/draftsearch.htm?year=2010&round=3
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100704013154/http://flyers.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=533489 to http://flyers.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=533489
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070516110244/http://www.hockeydb.com/ to http://www.hockeydb.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:24, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]