Does anyone know how the placement of the picks works for teams that make the playoffs but get eliminated in the first round? Like if we lose in the first round, but finish 14th overall in the league, are we locked into a specific draft pick?
Which 1st Rounder to Forfeit?
- Thread starter Boud
- Start date
Sun God Nika
Palestine <3.
Pic won’t change unless we go to conference finals
BigRig4
Registered User
- Feb 22, 2014
- 3,156
- 2,293
Yeah this is it - learnt it while I was obsessing over Boston’s pick we owned last year.
let's hope the lads reach the ECF to make the decision easier
Senator Stanley
Registered User
The decision itself has to be made within 24 hours of the draft lottery, which is expected to be on May 5th or 6th I believe. That probably lines up with the start of round 2, meaning the Sens - if they haven't already been eliminated - wouldn't know if they've made it to the ECF at the time they have to make their decision.
BigRig4
Registered User
- Feb 22, 2014
- 3,156
- 2,293
Senators choose to keep 2024 first-round pick
The Ottawa Senators will not be forfeiting the seventh overall pick at the 2024 NHL Draft, according to general manager Steve Staios.
Last year we had to decide 24 hours after the lottery so definitely not.
Masterplan
Registered User
- May 9, 2022
- 102
- 152
This is easy. Win the cup and give up the 2025.
Nac Mac Feegle
wee & free
- Jun 10, 2011
- 34,885
- 10,504
Another thought...if we have two 2nd rounders in 2026, we could package them to get a 2025 1st if we really feel the need to get a prospect this year. And who knows...if teams really value 2026 so much more, that 2025 pick could be at a decent range (maybe 15-20?).
That could take out a bit of the sting of losing our own first. It still kinda sucks, but it keeps the pipeline moving a bit more than waiting til 2026.
That could take out a bit of the sting of losing our own first. It still kinda sucks, but it keeps the pipeline moving a bit more than waiting til 2026.
Let's say Staios absolutely wants to pick in 2025 and our pick is where it sits right now, 19th.
Then we might as well shop our 2026 pick unprotected before agreeing to give it up, and see what kind of value an unprotected pick in the McKenna draft would have. As in, how high of a 2025 1st round pick could we get back for it, and what kind of conditional sweetener could we get if it wins the lottery.
This would be a slightly different outside the box idea than the one I suggested earlier in the thread. In this scenario, we like someone we are confident will be there at 19 or higher, so we already know we are giving up an unprotected 2026 pick to the league. There is no downside to shopping that 2026 pick before giving it up and seeing if we can get a similar pick to a 2025 19th OA back, and then some sort of conditional sweetener to compensate us if the unprotected 2026 pick wins the lottery. Like we get a protected 1st if the pick wins the draft lottery.
For example:
I don't think that we should keep the 2025 pick, but this is a scenario where Staios decides he absolutely is going to keep the 2025 pick. If I am a rival GM who isn't too thrilled about who is available in that ballpark, I would be all over swapping for an unprotected pick next year. The conditional element would be extremely unlikely to transfer, and if you're Calgary and it does transfer, you're thrilled because it means you traded probably two mid or late 1sts for a top 2 pick.
For Ottawa, even if they don't make this trade, they would have lost a top 2 pick. In this scenario, there is at least a conditional sweetener coming to soften the blow.
Then we might as well shop our 2026 pick unprotected before agreeing to give it up, and see what kind of value an unprotected pick in the McKenna draft would have. As in, how high of a 2025 1st round pick could we get back for it, and what kind of conditional sweetener could we get if it wins the lottery.
This would be a slightly different outside the box idea than the one I suggested earlier in the thread. In this scenario, we like someone we are confident will be there at 19 or higher, so we already know we are giving up an unprotected 2026 pick to the league. There is no downside to shopping that 2026 pick before giving it up and seeing if we can get a similar pick to a 2025 19th OA back, and then some sort of conditional sweetener to compensate us if the unprotected 2026 pick wins the lottery. Like we get a protected 1st if the pick wins the draft lottery.
For example:
- 2025 NJD 1st Round Pick (18th Overall)
- Conditional 1st Round Pick in 2026 or 2027 (Transfers if Ottawa's pick wins the draft lottery. The lower of the VGK or CGY 1st round pick. Or, Calgary's 1st in 2027.)
- 2026 OTT 1st Round Pick (Unprotected)
- 2025 OTT 1st Round Pick (19th OA)
I don't think that we should keep the 2025 pick, but this is a scenario where Staios decides he absolutely is going to keep the 2025 pick. If I am a rival GM who isn't too thrilled about who is available in that ballpark, I would be all over swapping for an unprotected pick next year. The conditional element would be extremely unlikely to transfer, and if you're Calgary and it does transfer, you're thrilled because it means you traded probably two mid or late 1sts for a top 2 pick.
For Ottawa, even if they don't make this trade, they would have lost a top 2 pick. In this scenario, there is at least a conditional sweetener coming to soften the blow.
aragorn
Do The Right Thing
- Aug 8, 2004
- 28,596
- 10,679
If the Sens end up in the late teens or into the twenties in the 2026 draft which players in those ranges are people wanting to draft that are going to be better players than the players in the 2025 draft who are ranked close to where the Sens could draft in this yr's draft? It's mot likely we won't be anywhere near having a shot of getting into the top 10 next yr & much more likely we will be in the high teens to twenties as we are this yr. So who exactly would we be missing out on by not drafting next yr?
ijif
Registered User
- Dec 20, 2018
- 747
- 764
It's not about missing out on a player. It's about mitigating risk.
aragorn
Do The Right Thing
- Aug 8, 2004
- 28,596
- 10,679
Mitigating risk? Every draft pick is a risk & you never really know how that pick will turn out especially as you get deeper in the round. I don't see how a pick in next yrs draft around the same ranking, is any different than a pick in this yrs draft which looks like it could be in the late teens or early 20s. There are a few really good players in this yrs draft that could still be around when the Sens pick or could drop to them that could turn into a good player for them. Greig got drafted in the high 20s & he has been terrific for them, so has Pinto early 2nd rd pick, both should have went much higher. After 15, it depends more on the player than the draft IMO.
ijif
Registered User
- Dec 20, 2018
- 747
- 764
I'm not talking about picks around the same ranking, deeper into the draft. I am talking about the fact that it is possible that we could not do as well next year. Anything can happen. Is it likely that we collapse next year and pick in the top 10 or some other bad scenario? No. Is it possible? Yes, and there is no draft eligible player in the 18-20 range (as used by OP) that merits taking on that risk, no matter how small. Sure, maybe it is nice to add a prospect a year earlier, all things equal, but that benefit does not outweigh the risk.
darude
Registered User
- Apr 10, 2025
- 20
- 57
Right now there's a lot of scouting eyeballs on kids eligible for this draft and next. I suspect that we'll decide to ditch the pick this year based on the draft class depth. If Staios believes (as he should IMO) that next year the team will be as good or better than this year, then the pick can only go lower and the reasons for keeping the 2026 pick would basically boil down to them thinking that's gonna be a deeper draft and it's better to make a pick in the first round next year. There's also something to be said for getting it over with.
Ouroboros
There is no armour against Fate
- Feb 3, 2008
- 15,163
- 12,415
Seems like they're keeping the 2025 pick.
Sens of Anarchy
Registered User
- Jul 9, 2013
- 65,144
- 55,658
He also said “And I’m hoping I still get some kind of forgiveness from the commissioner, honestly.”
I’m not holding my breath for some sort of reduced penalty but I do think it’s interesting Andlauer keeps bringing it up. Could just be him trying to put more pressure on Bettman but I’d like to believe he still think there’s an actual chance for a reduced penalty.
That’s really the only scenario I’d personally use the pick in this year. I don’t think we’re likely to be much worse next year if at all but with this being a weaker draft it sort of seems like an unnecessary risk.
I’m not holding my breath for some sort of reduced penalty but I do think it’s interesting Andlauer keeps bringing it up. Could just be him trying to put more pressure on Bettman but I’d like to believe he still think there’s an actual chance for a reduced penalty.
That’s really the only scenario I’d personally use the pick in this year. I don’t think we’re likely to be much worse next year if at all but with this being a weaker draft it sort of seems like an unnecessary risk.
aragorn
Do The Right Thing
- Aug 8, 2004
- 28,596
- 10,679
Why would it be likely we collapse next season? If anything we could also be better next yr, who is to say? Anything can happen as you said, but I doubt we make decisions based on the worse case scenario. Either way is a risk, I doubt either way they go matters much in the long term. If they have an opportunity to draft a good player this yr they should go for it, I don't see any reason to wait for the following draft. Hoping we do badly next season so we will have a shot at a better player is not a strategy.
Hoping Bettman just lets us pick 32nd overall, everyone else behind us in the standings gets a bump up
Golden_Jet
Registered User
- Sep 21, 2005
- 22,713
- 15,910
If you want to mitigate risk, kick the can down the road, and keep the pressure on the NHL. Which seems like Sens are actually going to do.
Bjornar Moxnes
Stem Rødt og Felix Unger Sörum
Even if we improve a ton, other teams can also improve. If Boston has a fully healthy McAvoy, Lindholm, and their first overall pick somehow steps in and plays well, along with Swayman bouncing back. That can be scary. What if we suffer a lot of injuries?
ijif
Registered User
- Dec 20, 2018
- 747
- 764
That is a strange first question. I did not claim it is likely we would collapse next season. In fact, I claimed the opposite.
We could be better next year. We could be worse. We could be the same. Those three outcomes do not have the same probability of occurring. We are making a decision under uncertainty. I don't care how they are making the choice. It's not my rep or job on the line. If they want to "gamble", they can.
Yes, pretty much every decision in life has risk, but like the outcomes listed above, the risks of each decision are not equal. This is true of rewards, too.
I do agree that either way, it likely does not overly matter. We are probably going to be roughly the same next year as this year, and we are probably going to get a roughly similar prospect in either draft.
I think it's fine to have the opinion that we should use the 2025 pick, but if you cannot see any reason to give up the 2025 pick, I don't think you are truly engaging with the argument or discussion.
Lastly, no poster on this board is hoping we do badly next year.
ijif
Registered User
- Dec 20, 2018
- 747
- 764
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Pre-Game Talk: The Only Series We’ve Ever Known: Oilers @ Kings (42 Viewers)- Latest: KeithIsActuallyBad
