HF's definition of "prospect" - explanation anyone?

[Ted Hoffman]

One of the Blues posters asked why Mike Glumac wasn't considered a prospect by HF, so I looked up HF's criteria and since Glumac is 25 (DOB 4/5/1980) he's too old by HF's definition.

However, then I read the criteria for European players:

3. European players who sign their first NHL contract at or above the age of 22 have three seasons from the time they sign that contract to meet the above criteria. Those European players below the age of 22 that have signed a NHL contract will be subjected to the criteria in section one.

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/whatmakesaprospect.php

So if I'm reading this right, wouldn't this imply that Magnus Kahnberg (DOB 2/25/1980) should be considered a Blues prospect by HF once he signs an NHL contract? I don't see anything in the definition above which would imply that it only counts if said player is under age whatever, and I'm just trying to get a clarification here.

Click to read more...

 

[David A. Rainer]

He would need to sign the contract before the season of his 24th bday. If he does not sign before his 24th bday, his eligibility as a prospect lapses and he can't get it back by signing later down the line. Once it lapses, that's it.

The additional three years rule was put into place to allow a little extra time for NCAA and european players that often sign much later than junior players. But if they don't sign before their status lapses on their 24th bday, then they do not receive the benefit of the extra time.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

He would need to sign the contract before the season of his 24th bday. If he does not sign before his 24th bday, his eligibility as a prospect lapses and he can't get it back by signing later down the line. Once it lapses, that's it.

The additional three years rule was put into place to allow a little extra time for NCAA and european players that often sign much later than junior players. But if they don't sign before their status lapses on their 24th bday, then they do not receive the benefit of the extra time.

That's fine - I think that's completely fair. Can that be clarified in the definition? It's not readily apparent that if the player's older than 24 when he signs that first contract, he's not considered a prospect.

 

[Hasbro]

Prospect>cup

 

[mooseOAK*]

I think that an age should be chosen and make that the rule.

 

[Kevin Forbes]

I disagree.
There are players older then 20 who are playing college hockey or in Europe that should still be considered prospects.
Then there's players like Crosby or Meszaros who are undoubtably NHL players.
The line needs to be flexible enough to account for both.

 

[Vyse64]

only problem I have with the prospect status is the number of NHL games played, 65 games then you graduate, the number is too high and should be cut down to around 30-40

 

[mooseOAK*]

I disagree.
There are players older then 20 who are playing college hockey or in Europe that should still be considered prospects.
Then there's players like Crosby or Meszaros who are undoubtably NHL players.
The line needs to be flexible enough to account for both.

It depends on the organization that the player belongs to. Some teams, usually the ones lower in the standings, tend to bring prospects up sooner while others leave them in juniors, Europe or the AHl longer. No definition is perfect but at least with age there should be fewer questions as to who is or isn't a prospect.