The Rangers’ spot is yet to be determined by the ping pong balls on May 5th, but we now know for certain that they have secured a top 5 pick in the 2026 NHL Draft. How to use a top 10 pick has been widely discussed, as some think best player available, while others think draft for position. During their last rebuild, the Rangers invested four of their five lottery picks in wingers, with Lias Andersson being the only non-winger drafted in the top 15.
Part of that was circumstance, as the Rangers won two lotteries when the consensus pick at their spot was a winger. It would have been very bold to go in another direction in 2019, and I would argue the main alternative, Kirby Dach, has not panned out either. In 2020, that alternative was Byfield, who has also been good but has not lived up to expectations. Sometimes it’s not about how to use a top 10 pick, it’s about luck when choosing best player available.
In 2018, a draft with a much stronger defensive prospect crop than forwards (much like this upcoming draft class), the Rangers passed on Evan Bouchard and Noah Dobson to draft Vitali Kravtsov. Perhaps those players would have been redundant given the trade and the emergence of Adam Fox – who, by the way, turned in an excellent season that would have garnered Norris consideration had he played 82 games. And, in fairness, Joel Farabee is one of the few first-round forwards drafted after Kravtsov who has looked good. Picking for position isn’t a guarantee either.
Often, the narrative around picking a center or defenseman high focuses on both being premium positions. I was curious about the actual success rate of these picks inside the top 10, so I analyzed the top 10 picks from 10 consecutive drafts to see if any clear trends emerged.
How to use a top 10 pick
I believe it was Brian Burke who said that you need to give 1st-round picks 3 years to show that they were worth their draft position. I don’t agree with that standard for late-first picks, but I do think it generally holds true for lottery picks. However, I wanted to be lenient when reviewing how to use a top 10 pick and grant an extra season to increase confidence in my evaluations, so my cut-off draft was 2022. To make the sample 10 years’ worth of picks, the first year I used was 2013.
I evaluated the players using a combination of public perception, analytics, eye test, and honestly, my own take on them. I placed the players into 5 different tiers: Bust, NHLer, Top 6/Top 4, Star, Superstar. I’d characterize those definitions as follows:
- Bust: Not a reliable NHL player, never trusted in a middle 6 or bottom pair role for a sustained period
- NHLer: Long career in the league, likely in a 3rd line role or as a #5 defenseman
- Top 6/Top 4: Self-evident from title, long career in the league playing and producing in a secondary role
- Star: A first-line or first-pairing player for much of their career
- Superstar: 100-point forwards and Norris-contending defensemen
For some of the (vomit) older players from the 2013 class, keep in mind that this evaluation is at their sustained peak, not where they are right now. For example, I think Sean Monahan was a star forward in his prime. I tallied the players in each category by position, and then calculated the “bust rate” (optimal tip-to-tip efficiency) of players drafted by position in the top 10, top 5, and picks 3 through 5, as that is likely the Rangers’ range.
You can find the link to my evaluations and the data here.
Key Takeaways
Immediately, one trend is clear: Wingers are by far the riskiest position to draft in the top 10, providing both the highest bust rate (26%) and the fewest top 6/4+ outcomes, albeit marginally. That’s a 34-player sample size, making it both statistically relevant and clear that it’s not only the Rangers who have struggled to develop top-10 winger picks. Seeing this data trend is evidence of the big reason I never bought the hype for this draft class. A draft without elite center prospects provides more risky outcomes.
I was particularly interested to see how the trends would shift once I removed the top 2 picks from the equation, as centers make up half of the top 2 draft picks over this time period (10 centers, 4 defensemen, 6 wingers) and include many of the best players in the world today. However, even when you remove guys like MacKinnon, McDavid, Eichel, and Matthews from the equation, center is still the position with the least risk and the strongest top 6+ outcome rate.
That said, while they carry an increased risk of busting, wingers and defensemen vastly outperform center draft picks in star outcomes in the 3-5 pick range. So what does that mean for the Rangers in a draft with two wingers at the top, a glut of good defensemen, and three contentious center prospects (including Viggo Bjorck)?
Let’s not focus on what should happen if they secure a top-two pick. We can cross the McKenna vs. Stenberg vs. Reid/Carels bridge when we actually get there. What we know right now is that the Rangers are most likely to select between picks 3 and 5, and in this range, the debate will be drafting whichever top defenseman is left vs Malhotra/Lawrence/Bjorck.
The data shows that if you want to take some risk with stronger odds of higher upside, then drafting one of the defensemen or Bjorck is the way to go, as some think he will play wing. Drafting a center would provide the most likely payoff of a top 6 player, and by far the lowest bust potential, but also some lower ceiling. I honestly find that decision challenging on the surface level.
Over the next couple of months, I will do the best I can to marry this data regarding how to use a top 10 pick with a more holistic view of the scouting profiles of the top of this draft. I look forward to digging back into the class this spring and figuring out which direction the Rangers should go, no matter where they pick.