Also a fan of a (hopefully for just the time being) "have not" team and agree. He's got "play where your chosen, go elsewhere or ARRANGE A TRADE" Huh? I don't think anyone will arrange anything better than the current scenario. Do some teams have some inherent advantages that will always slant the field in their direction? Yes, London fans it's actually true. Are some teams likely pushing the rules? Yes, London (and other teams) fans. It's likely true. Can any team be competitive in recruiting and on the ice by getting good billets, coaches, facilities, developmental models, ect, ect? Yes, everybody else, that's true also. London fans aren't wrong in saying struggling teams need to up their game. After learning how much OHL scouts make, I don't believe any team should be suffering from lack of scouting.
East/West Discrepancy
- Thread starter Fischhaber
- Start date
Also a fan of a (hopefully for just the time being) "have not" team and agree. He's got "play where your chosen, go elsewhere or ARRANGE A TRADE" Huh? I don't think anyone will arrange anything better than the current scenario. Do some teams have some inherent advantages that will always slant the field in their direction? Yes, London fans it's actually true. Are some teams likely pushing the rules? Yes, London (and other teams) fans. It's likely true. Can any team be competitive in recruiting and on the ice by getting good billets, coaches, facilities, developmental models, ect, ect? Yes, everybody else, that's true also. London fans aren't wrong in saying struggling teams need to up their game. After learning how much OHL scouts make, I don't believe any team should be suffering from lack of scouting.
I always hear this "improve your program" mantra when this topic is discussed. I'd really like to hear what improvements teams like Barrie, Owen Sound, Niagara and Ottawa need to make in order to compete with London and Windsor for the high end Americans that those teams always seem able to land.
It was a bit tongue in cheek. Really, a team like Owen Sound has no financial ability to compete with London when it comes to goodie packages.
Striclty speaking, when it comes to straight up development as a hockey player, a player will develop just as well playing in Owen Sound, Barrie, North Bay, Kingston or Guelph as he would in London or Windsor.
youngblood10
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2010
- 1,401
- 629
At least the league punished Windsor with sanctions and crippled them for a few years. Only draw back was it gave London a monopoly on the blue chippers and has resulted in the Knights playing in the Memorial Cup annually.
I don't know if that's true. All of the supports that they have in place allow players to focus more on hockey than they would on other teams. Professional level training facilities and equipment can also help.
If I were a player that would certainly attract me. There are exceptions like Erie and SSM that do it with better coaching and a better system than London, but it's unrealistic for every team to be able to do that.
knowescape
Made you look
One of the best ways to improve your program is to have big name talent report. Catch 22 huh? If you implement a pick and play policy then there is less likelihood the key "have" teams will gobble up high priced talent in the late rounds for free. If they have to start trading market value for those players because a "have not" team owns his rights for the entire five years, sure the first few years they will, but eventually that dries up. The "have" teams will need to tell those players they can't afford to pay what they're worth. Then it becomes play where you're picked or go home. You never hear of an NHL draftee saying "no thanks" to the team that drafts them. The OHL has to have faith in its entire league. Yes initially a few players will bail. Yes I can also see the league having to restructure some rules or teams, but overall the entire product becomes better in time.
A consistent winning program? The same coach that's had dozens of players drafted including a bunch in the first round? A shot at the MC regularly? Remember where London was 20 years ago. Building up from not a lot can be done. I said there were some inherent advantages (geography/Blythe for sure/glam stadium/zero mgmt, coaching turnover) and also tried to gently put there MAY be some rule bending. The Soo does pretty well pulling Americans. Plymouth did and they didn't have a great fan base or flashy stadium. Kitchener does well. Other teams have had success with big time Americans on the roster. Maybe not as many as a London or Windsor though. You MIGHT being seeing a couple big time Americans going to Saginaw real soon. After reading what OHL scouts make, there's no reason for any team to not have enough to be scouring tournaments all over for DeBrincats and Busdekers in addition to regular picks. Philosophy is changing a bit in the OHL. I think you're gonna be seeing a less extreme slant of players ending up those locations in the near future. Let's hope. The league certainly needs a little more parity.
knowescape
Made you look
knowescape
Made you look
As for Erie, Connor McDavid defied the convention at the time and agreed to play where he was drafted despite Erie being a "have not" team. The result was that other hot prospects also agreed to do so to play with McDavid, turning the Otters into a competitive team. Send McDavid to London instead and what would the hockey landscape look like in Pennsylvania today. Thank you for making my argument for me (reference to the intelligence of Ontario fans excepted).
It's unfair to Kris Knoblauch to say that Erie would not have been successful without McDavid. He's an excellent coach that has turned a lot of unheralded young men into NHL prospects. They don't rely on big name recruits and are the model that all teams should follow.
You are incredibly uninformed about the way the league works and it is hard to take your points seriously.
knowescape
Made you look
You'll get full agreement from me on Kris' abilities as a coach but absent the high end talent you can't turn a sow's ear into a silk purse.
It's very fair and accurate; to say, it was McDavid that attracted Knoblauch to Erie. It seems that you are naive to believe anything other than the arrival of McDavid made it possible for that franchise to become that successful that fast. Knoblauch is without a doubt one of the very best coaches in all of the CHL; but, I have never heard him described as a generational talent.
Would have to agree that it was McDavid that entirely started it all. He dragged Knoblauch to Erie for sure. If that wasn't in the topic of pulling Knoblauch to Erie, then why wouldn't it have been? I'm sure bassin used the chance to coach McDavid as a chip to bring in Kris.
But again there is one high profile guy that agrees to come to Erie and that's all it takes. Turned everything around. We became competitive and all of the sudden your other positives show up- new arena, great crowd, solid city, great coaching, etc. now that success is sustainable post McDavid. But it has to start somewhere. McDavid turned the tide. Wish other big namers would do the same
knowescape
Made you look
You don't know a thing about my level of knowledge or experience, I just put forth a few that was contrary to your belief system. Read your first post in this thread and see if you are upholding your end of the bargain in keeping things "friendly" .
There was a reason they nicknamed Connor "McFranchise" - his level of talent was (and is) so high that he elevated the entire profile of the team. As a generational player that level of change wrapped up in one person is rare. If a club was able to draft a few higher end players in succession, they could be game changers as well.
The notion that a "have not" team just has to try harder is akin to suggesting they eat cake when they have no bread (Google Bastille Day if the reference is obscure).
I am happy to concede you make great arguments on the side of status quo. It is far easier to draft extreme talent and have them report than to cultivate it or trade your assets for it.
Erie remains successful to this day without a lot of high end recruits because they have a good program and a good coach. They haven't really seen a huge dropoff since McDavid left.
Use Sheldon Keefe as an example if you don't agree that Knoblauch has a bigger influence on the Otter's continued success than McDavid. He went to a last place team that adopted a new way of thinking and changed the league. There are always possibilities if a team is willing to work hard and think outside the box.
Last edited:
knowescape
Made you look
Ok fact time, past ten years, which "have not" teams have pulled themselves up by their bootstraps and won by coaching and developing average players alone?
Battallion.
Erie, Soo, Barrie, Niagara have been among the top seven teams over the last 4-5 years; all of them needed a sell off and the benefit of missing the playoffs. For the Soo, it was missing the playoffs 3 out of 4 years and twice selling big.
London, NB, & Oshawa (minus Taveres trade) can claim to have sustained success over 10 season
Last edited:
knowescape
Made you look
Average players is very vague. The vast majority of great players are still Canadian. Erie, Oshawa, and Sault Ste. Marie have been thee top teams for several years now without spending a ton of cash or nabbing high draftees that won't report (like London and Windsor do). North Bay does very well in large part because of Stan Butler's system. Plymouth had a great run under Mike Vellucci, I think the record for most consecutive playoff appearances.
In regards to another comment about the Soo, they got good because Kyle Dubas pioneered analytics in the league and got a great system in place. That's why they have remained successful.
I believe the systems Dubas and Keefe put in place may have extended the hounds (cycle) a little; but, adding the Soo to the list of top teams for (several years) is a stretch, IMO. London, Erie, Oshawa, Barrie, Niagara, and North Bay have been top two seeds and/or have been to at least the conference final a few times over the past 6 or 7 seasons or approximately the time it takes for the top teams to contend, have a very short rebuild, and contend again.
This could very well be the hounds second time contending in only four seasons; which, is pretty good. Will last year's mediocre season prove to be their short re-tooling period?
I think that if the hounds add at this deadline, a major rebuild is in coming. I really hope London, Erie, Soo all add; the west could be an awesome playoff.
Is having a good season in the stacked Westen Conference and going to the second round really considered 'not contending'?
Yes.
A decent team from the west that really does not have a legitimate chance of winning a series against one of the stacked mid-west teams can be considered a non-contender. Last season, the hounds & west division were mediocre.
This year, the hounds (adding) and the spits are/can be contenders. Go hounds
