"Draft capital" is one of the few that I don't mind, because it identifies something of numerical value. Not all first rounders are equal, so to say that a team with a higher pick has more draft capital is an empirical reference. It only really becomes useful when identifying multiple picks, or in direct comparison of value. It might be easier to say, "Calgary has the draft capital available to purchase Marc Staal, instead of saying that Calgary has a third, two fifths and a seventh". It identifies a range instead of specifics.
"Defenseman Capital" and that sort of thing is stupid, because unless you are cutting off a players leg and throwing it on the ice, there is no way to break down a player into constituent parts. "Capital" by it's nature seems to indicate value by terms of payment. I think that in hockey "Draft" is the only time that this works. Using it in other hockey context deserves a slap.
__________________
"By Grabthar's hammer ... what a savings."
|