Ncaa/chl ?

Status
Not open for further replies.

VOB

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,692
0
Michigan
Visit site
Well Zine I guess we will have to agree to disagree. From what I saw of Wisconsin and Miami, the top CHL teams would be able to hold their own...and like I said, the differences in age are not all that pronounced.

The number one ranked team in the CHL right now is Moncton. I have not seen them play live but have seen them on T.V./Film. They are a very good club.They are fast, strong and big. Their average age is 19.3(compared to 21 for NoDak) and I am confident they would give NoDak one heck of a game, and for the record, only three of Nodak's drafted players are over the age of 20! The majority are 18 and 19, similar age to what you will find in the NCAA.

Of course we will never conclusively know will we, and that is a shame because many people would be surprised.
 
Last edited:

Hiishawk

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
1,225
2
Out there somewhere
Visit site
As someone who has worked in the CHL, has been a pro scout, and had connections with NCAA recruiting I can safely say that talent judgment goes something like this-
If there is a 17 year old who has just finished tier two junior or USHS and is, say, a 3rd or 4th round NHL draft choice, the expectation is that - on average- that player should be a top 6 FW top 4 DF rookie at worst if he chooses the CHL route, but a likely 3rd liner or 3rd pairing DF freshman if he chooses the NCAA. This is because CHL teams have many 16 and 17 year olds playing, high school-aged kids, most all of whom you would have to assume that this player is ahead of in terms of development, whereas only an elite level 17 year old could make an NCAA team.

By the way, a 17 year old playing regularly in the NCAA really raises scouts' interest levels (talent-wise, not scholastically), whereas its commonplace of course in the CHL.

Those of you who have stated that you've watched both NCAA games and CHL games should remember that how players look in a game is relative to the other players in that game. I've seen NHL and World Championship games where, at first glance, it looks like a good junior team could beat them because, well, they were bad games with no flow. I've also seen some excellent bantam games where the flow and (relative) speed makes it look like they could beat junior teams. But in reality you know that they wouldn't.
 

MN_Gopher

Registered User
May 2, 2002
3,628
21
Mpls
Visit site
VOB said:
Three years ago I went to the Aud in Kitchener to watch a bunch of Team Canada hopefuls play an allstar team from the CIS. Now this was Canada's tryout roster and about 5 or 6 players who were assured slots did not dress. The average age of these young junior hopefuls was probably slightly under 19 years. The average age of the University kids had to be upwards of 22 and probably closer to 23. According to you it should have been no contest right. I mean here you have a 4 year age spread and some of the best players from the Canadian University ranks (many of them who go on to have pro careers in the AHL/ECHL and Europe) against what many of you consider gangly uncoordinated kids. The game was no contest. The CHLers blew the doors off the University kids. Age wasn't much of a factor here.


Not the same thing at all. How many of those CIS players went on to become NHL all stars or even played NHL or AHL. A pro career in the AHL is no comparison to a junior or senior named; Jordan Leopold, Keith Ballard, Paul Martin, Rob Blake, Martin St Louis, Joe Nieuwendyk, Jason Blake, Chris Drury, Brandon Bochenski, Patrick Eaves, Marty Turco, Brendan Morrison, Antii Laaksonen, Rene Bourque, Brian Gionta, Brian Rafalski, John-Micheal Liles, Mike Grier, Tom Preissing and the list can go way way way on if you like. These are not career AHL guys. Thats the 20 year + year olds in the NCAA. Those guys at 20, better than most anybody the CHL can offer.
 

Letang fan 58

No More Fleury
May 12, 2004
5,814
1
Canada
MN_Gopher said:
Not the same thing at all. How many of those CIS players went on to become NHL all stars or even played NHL or AHL. A pro career in the AHL is no comparison to a junior or senior named; Jordan Leopold, Keith Ballard, Paul Martin, Rob Blake, Martin St Louis, Joe Nieuwendyk, Jason Blake, Chris Drury, Brandon Bochenski, Patrick Eaves, Marty Turco, Brendan Morrison, Antii Laaksonen, Rene Bourque, Brian Gionta, Brian Rafalski, John-Micheal Liles, Mike Grier, Tom Preissing and the list can go way way way on if you like. These are not career AHL guys. Thats the 20 year + year olds in the NCAA. Those guys at 20, better than most anybody the CHL can offer.

I would say, no your wrong, at most points in the CHL they have a team that could have matched that team when 19 or 20. are you telling me that turco is better then 1 chl goalie every third year? Not very likley. Outside of Rob Blake...who is matched by Dion Phaneuf, Shea Weber, likley Cam Barker, Ryan Parent, Marc Staal and so on in a few years what players that you mention dominate over guys that the CHL consistently puts out?

You are trying to compare a Gopher team which recruits almost all of the college top players to an average CHL team.........try comparing an average College team to an average CHL team and see where you come out. I believe the numbers of teams throughout both are very similar.....there just is no comparison.

If the CHL allowed players to go where they wanted and all the best players tried out for say Kelowna or Ottawa or wherever each year it wouldnt be close.
 

Zine

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
11,955
1,772
Rostov-on-Don
phaneuf_fan_3 said:
I would say, no your wrong, at most points in the CHL they have a team that could have matched that team when 19 or 20. are you telling me that turco is better then 1 chl goalie every third year? Not very likley. Outside of Rob Blake...who is matched by Dion Phaneuf, Shea Weber, likley Cam Barker, Ryan Parent, Marc Staal and so on in a few years what players that you mention dominate over guys that the CHL consistently puts out?

Just because its a better developmental league doesn't mean it's at a higher level of play. For example, the CHL developes more NHLers than the Russian Super League, even though the Russian League is miles ahead in terms of level of play.
I'm not comparing the NCAA to the RSL, but but get the picture.
 

Zine

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
11,955
1,772
Rostov-on-Don
VOB said:
Well Zine I guess we will have to agree to disagree. From what I saw of Wisconsin and Miami, the top CHL teams would be able to hold their own...and like I said, the differences in age are not all that pronounced.

The number one ranked team in the CHL right now is Moncton. I have not seen them play live but have seen them on T.V./Film. They are a very good club.They are fast, strong and big. Their average age is 19.3(compared to 21 for NoDak) and I am confident they would give NoDak one heck of a game, and for the record, only three of Nodak's drafted players are over the age of 20! The majority are 18 and 19, similar age to what you will find in the NCAA.

Of course we will never conclusively know will we, and that is a shame because many people would be surprised.

Just by looking at their rosters, there is no way Moncton would be able to handle North Dakota. Not even close. Even among similar aged players - compare the talent level.

Dupuis, Goulet, Yandle, Marchand, Girard, <<<<<<<< Stafford, Zajac, Spirko, Toews, Oshie. Not to mention UND is struggling due to their youth in the NCAA. It's fitting that Pineault is on the team; a guy who couldn't hack it in the NCAA. :biglaugh:

steblick bring up a good point about how common it is for 16-17 year olds to be in the CHL, whereas only an elite level 17 year old could make an NCAA team. Even if they were eligible, there's no way a 16 year old would make an NCAA squad.
 

VOB

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,692
0
Michigan
Visit site
Zine said:
Just by looking at their rosters, there is no way Moncton would be able to handle North Dakota. Not even close. Even among similar aged players - compare the talent level.
.


Yandle and Bourdon are better than anything you have on the back-end - and yes I am including Lee and Chorney! Your offense strikes fear into no one! Spirko - give me a break! Its fitting that one of your top offensive players would be a 1986 born freshman and that you rely a great deal on a 17 year old for a great part of your offense.

As for Pineualt, funny how he was good enough to crack the U.S. WJC as an 18 year old. It was probably a mistake not to include him on this year's U.S. roster, as he had a very good summer evaluation camp.

Moncton would definitely give NoDak a game, and then some!
 

MN_Gopher

Registered User
May 2, 2002
3,628
21
Mpls
Visit site
phaneuf_fan_3 said:
I would say, no your wrong, at most points in the CHL they have a team that could have matched that team when 19 or 20. are you telling me that turco is better then 1 chl goalie every third year? Not very likley. Outside of Rob Blake...who is matched by Dion Phaneuf, Shea Weber, likley Cam Barker, Ryan Parent, Marc Staal and so on in a few years what players that you mention dominate over guys that the CHL consistently puts out?

You are trying to compare a Gopher team which recruits almost all of the college top players to an average CHL team.........try comparing an average College team to an average CHL team and see where you come out. I believe the numbers of teams throughout both are very similar.....there just is no comparison.

If the CHL allowed players to go where they wanted and all the best players tried out for say Kelowna or Ottawa or wherever each year it wouldnt be close.

You are telling me that a 18 year old Parent, Barker, even Phanuef are better than a 20 year old Blake? I mean Rob Blake forerly of the Kings. I am saying that Turco at 23 is better than most any 18 year old goalie.

And it is not Minnesota. Its CC, DU, BC, NoDak, WI, BU if they get their act together, Mich, Maine, NH. The top teams in the NCAA. Yeah average NCAA vs average CHL you got a very good game. But remember the more average the NCAA team. Usually the age factor goes up. With guys playing 1-3 years in the USHL, BCHL, AJHL. Some guys getting up to 23-25. Now with an average team lets say AA. You see alot of 81, 82, 83 born. 4 of those 81 born. With only 2 86 born. With an average CHL team vs that average NCAA team the age difference is about 3-4 full years. Simular with a team like Mich Tech. They have an 80 born and only 1 86 born. Alabama Huntsville has 2 85 born as its oldest. Nodak and Minneota are the two most talented on paper and they are also the two youngest in their conference. Minnesota is getting better play from their upper classmen and thats the difference.


And have any of you ever watched a Huntsville vs top team game? If you claim to know some much about the NCAA you know how those games look. Picture the older team playing like that against an even younger team. Not pretty.
 

MN_Gopher

Registered User
May 2, 2002
3,628
21
Mpls
Visit site
VOB said:
Yandle and Bourdon are better than anything you have on the back-end - and yes I am including Lee and Chorney! Your offense strikes fear into no one! Spirko - give me a break! Its fitting that one of your top offensive players would be a 1986 born freshman and that you rely a great deal on a 17 year old for a great part of your offense.

As for Pineualt, funny how he was good enough to crack the U.S. WJC as an 18 year old. It was probably a mistake not to include him on this year's U.S. roster, as he had a very good summer evaluation camp.

Moncton would definitely give NoDak a game, and then some!

Smaby is thier best D man. Anyway. And Oshie seems to scare away from everyone out there. That was clear in the WJC. Stafford another guy that a poor showing when he played in the WJC a year ago. Zajac oh yeah is is garbage too. And you do realize that with all the draft picks on NoDak they are in 6th place i n the WCHA. And unless they win out or get some serious help. They will be forced to win the final five to make to the tourney. Meaning they are not even top 16 in the NCAA.

Thank you VOB they do rely on an 86 born and a 17 year old. Hence 6th place. You got it. Wow lets end this now. Thank You for seeing the light. Thought you may never get it.
 

Zine

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
11,955
1,772
Rostov-on-Don
VOB said:
Your offense strikes fear into no one! Spirko - give me a break! Its fitting that one of your top offensive players would be a 1986 born freshman and that you rely a great deal on a 17 year old for a great part of your offense.

Thanks for proving my point again.
It IS fitting that one of our top offensive players is a 1986 born player, and, yes, we do rely on Toews a great deal --- SO WHY DO YOU THINK WE ARE STRUGGLING THIS YEAR? It wouldn't be YOUTH would it? This isn't rocket science. :shakehead

Even so, they are still older and far better than the best CHL team.

As I said earlier, at the NCAA level, we are struggling because our upper talent is so young, but these younger players would tear any CHL team apart. UND is stacked with 6 1st round picks. Is there any CHL team that has 6 first rounders?

Seriously, name me one offensive player on Moncton that a GM would take over Stafford. ........I'm waiting.......anyone?.......DING DING DING..that right, Nobody! Now, how about Oshie?...Zajac?...Toews?...is there anyone?

D-men Bourdon and possibly Yandle are the only ones that are in this category. Add to that, the Sioux have Lee, Smaby, Chorney and Finley.

I see that Moncton's leading point getter is scoring sensation Philippe Dupuis, a 4th round overager. Considering this, do you realize what kind of sick numbers Stafford and Zajac (also 1985's) would put up in the CHL? Seriously, you don't have much of an argument.

It doesn't take a brain surgeon to see that, given UND's talent level, they'd do some serious damage in the CHL. Yet, because of youth, they're a run-of-the-mill WCHA team this year.
 
Last edited:

VOB

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,692
0
Michigan
Visit site
Zine said:
Thanks for proving my point again.

Even so, they are still older and far better than the best CHL team.


Seriously, name me one offensive player on Moncton that a GM would take over Stafford. ........I'm waiting.......anyone?.......DING DING DING..that right, Nobody! Now, how about Oshie?...Zajac?...Toews?...is there anyone?

D-men Bourdon and possibly Yandle are the only ones that are in this category. Add to that, the Sioux have Lee, Smaby, Chorney and Finley.
.

Moncton is a better coached team, possesses good team speed, size and is especially strong on the back end While NoDak may have two or three offensivly better forwards the rest of their forward unit is not any better than what Moncton could throw out. I would take Moncton in this game....

My point about Oshie and Toews was that here you have two "young" players who are the better ones on your team and would be on any other team. After all Oshie has more points than all but two Gopher forwards. Not bad for a couple of "saplings".
 

MikeC44

Registered User
Sep 18, 2003
454
0
Moncton, NB
Visit site
VOB said:
The number one ranked team in the CHL right now is Moncton. I have not seen them play live but have seen them on T.V./Film. They are a very good club.They are fast, strong and big. Their average age is 19.3(compared to 21 for NoDak) and I am confident they would give NoDak one heck of a game, and for the record, only three of Nodak's drafted players are over the age of 20! The majority are 18 and 19, similar age to what you will find in the NCAA.

We had a discussion on the Moncton Wildcats message board not too long ago about who would win in a game between the Wildcats and the U of Moncton Blue Eagles. Everyone picked the Blue Eagles, most picked a lopsided Blue Eagles win.
The age difference is just too much to overcome.

Now the age difference between the CHL and the NCAA is smaller (I would guess there isn't 1 player in the CIS younger than 20 years old), but the raw talent in the NCAA is better than in the CIS. This leads me to think that the average NCAA team would beat the average CHL team.

I just think of the 16 and 17 year old defencemen in junior, and how for the most part the coach tries to not have them matched up against the other team's 19 and 20 year old forwards, because they are overmatched. Then, I think of an NCAA team, and how most of their players are 20.

As for the question "Which is a better route", I think that is entirely up to the individual's priorities. Personally, I think if hockey is your #1 goal, then you want to play at the highest level possible at the youngest age possible. To me, that means for the top prospects, the way to go is the CHL. The difference being you can play Major Junior when you're 16-17, but if you chose the NCAA route you would have to play prep school or Jr A until you graduated from High School. That said, if you can accelerate your schooling, and get into University for your 17 year old season (like Toews and Thelan did), then go for it.
 

thomasincanada

Registered User
Mar 7, 2005
1,691
0
London, ON
MikeC44 said:
We had a discussion on the Moncton Wildcats message board not too long ago about who would win in a game between the Wildcats and the U of Moncton Blue Eagles. Everyone picked the Blue Eagles, most picked a lopsided Blue Eagles win.
The age difference is just too much to overcome.

I have had similar conversations in London and the general consensus was that the Knights would beat the Western Mustangs. We felt they would probably beat them this year, and last year I'd have bet my house on it.

I personally feel that if a CHL team has a bunch of good 19 year olds, the talent gap would probably overcome the maturity difference. Not to dis the CIS which I feel is very solid hockey, but it's usually the 3rd or 4th option for junior players when they are finished.
 

MikeC44

Registered User
Sep 18, 2003
454
0
Moncton, NB
Visit site
thomasincanada said:
I have had similar conversations in London and the general consensus was that the Knights would beat the Western Mustangs. We felt they would probably beat them this year, and last year I'd have bet my house on it.

I personally feel that if a CHL team has a bunch of good 19 year olds, the talent gap would probably overcome the maturity difference. Not to dis the CIS which I feel is very solid hockey, but it's usually the 3rd or 4th option for junior players when they are finished.

They would have to be some awfully good 19 (and 20) year olds, because some of those guys will be playing CIS hockey in a year or 2, and they won't step in a dominate.
Moncton, for instance has thirteen 19 and 20 year olds. 8 are undrafted. I don't think it would be a stretch to say 6 of them will end up playing in the CIS, and it's not a given that they will be top line Universty players right away. There are also 5 other 18 year olds who were passed over in last year's draft. I don't think any of them are going to end up as NHL stars.
So, except for the stars, Yandle, Bourdon, Dupuis, a few others, I think the majority of the Wildcats would have a hard time competing with a team of 21-25 year olds.
I guess the easiest way to explain it is this: most of the Blue Eagles were as good 3 or 4 years ago, as most of the Wildcats are now.
 

Zine

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
11,955
1,772
Rostov-on-Don
VOB said:
Moncton is a better coached team, possesses good team speed, size and is especially strong on the back end While NoDak may have two or three offensivly better forwards the rest of their forward unit is not any better than what Moncton could throw out. I would take Moncton in this game....

So now you're reduced to.......'well, Moncton is a better coached team' :shakehead

No, UND doesn't have 2 or 3 more offensive players...more like 5-6. If '86 Stephane Goulet is currently putting up 75 points, what would Oshie be doing? If '88 Brad Marchand is putting up 57 points, what would Toews be scoring? Then you have Zajac, Stafford, Spirko (every bit as good as Oshie/Toews due to age difference - look at the stats). And don't hype up Pineault..he didn't last in the NCAA and was left of the WJC for good reason, he was brutal for us last year.
That essentially nullifies Monctons top 2 lines.

Plus, where's this defensive depth of Monton's you talk about? Beyond Bourdon and Yandle you have Welton, MacDonald, Bartulis and Hepditch. A third rounder and 3 undrafted players?

VOB said:
My point about Oshie and Toews was that here you have two "young" players who are the better ones on your team and would be on any other team. After all Oshie has more points than all but two Gopher forwards. Not bad for a couple of "saplings".

Again, you've been reduced to using the exception to the norm to try and prove your point. Toews is the best Canadian '88, Oshie is turning out to be one heck of a first round pick up. If the average CHL player was on their level, I'd agree with everything your saying. But it's just not the case........far, far from it.
 

Sammy*

Guest
I have zero doubt a team like the U of A Bears would annihilate any junior team. If you look at the stats of their team, virtually every one of those guys was a highly accomplished player in the WHL. Furthurmore, they play the Oiler Rookies every year (which players would be alot better than any collection of players on a junior team) & generally handle them quite easily. Remember, the Oiler rookies are the cream of junior aged kids, & you dont have a number of guys who would never attend an NHL camp as would be on any junior team (like, about half the team).
Furthur, didnt the Canadian WJC team play a few University team in the leadup to the WJC?
 

thomasincanada

Registered User
Mar 7, 2005
1,691
0
London, ON
Sammy said:
I have zero doubt a team like the U of A Bears would annihilate any junior team. If you look at the stats of their team, virtually every one of those guys was a highly accomplished player in the WHL. Furthurmore, they play the Oiler Rookies every year (which players would be alot better than any collection of players on a junior team) & generally handle them quite easily. Remember, the Oiler rookies are the cream of junior aged kids, & you dont have a number of guys who would never attend an NHL camp as would be on any junior team (like, about half the team).

This is very poor logic. Firstly, this year they squeeked by 5-4 in overtime. Secondly, the Oilers Rookies aren't a team - they have no cohesion because they've been together a week or two, and throughout the week guys are cut and lines are mixed.

At the last minute they're thrown together on one team (even though they've been practising all week as two teams) and guys are played according to who Oilers Brass wants to see, not how well they are playing in the game.

The U of A game is little more than a practise for individuals - and far from a team effort.
 

Sammy*

Guest
thomasincanada said:
This is very poor logic. Firstly, this year they squeeked by 5-4 in overtime. Secondly, the Oilers Rookies aren't a team - they have no cohesion because they've been together a week or two, and throughout the week guys are cut and lines are mixed.

At the last minute they're thrown together on one team (even though they've been practising all week as two teams) and guys are played according to who Oilers Brass wants to see, not how well they are playing in the game.

The U of A game is little more than a practise for individuals - and far from a team effort.
Try using some, any logic.
Also, try looking at the accomplishments of a the players on a team like the Bears. Their players were all very good WHL players, unlike on any junior team there are all sorts of guys that would never be good enough to get on a team like the Bears.
Also, way to dismiss the fact that Oiler Rookies, who are older & a hell of alot better than the players on a junior team, cant beat or can barely beat the Bears.
 

thomasincanada

Registered User
Mar 7, 2005
1,691
0
London, ON
Sammy said:
Try using some, any logic.
Also, try looking at the accomplishments of a the players on a team like the Bears. Their players were all very good WHL players, unlike on any junior team there are all sorts of guys that would never be good enough to get on a team like the Bears.
Also, way to dismiss the fact that Oiler Rookies, who are older & a hell of alot better than the players on a junior team, cant beat or can barely beat the Bears.

Rob Schremp dominated the game this year and was first star. 2 months earlier he was on the second line of a junior team. Alberta couldn't handle him.

He's back playing junior again this year. Let me repeat that for you. The best player in that game is back playing junior. Apparently someone forgot to tell him the Oilers Rookies are older and a hell of a lot better than junior players. Perhaps you should go tell him.

If Rob Schremp had more of his old teammates, they'd have beaten that Alberta team without a doubt.
 
Last edited:

Trot

Registered User
Dec 4, 2002
132
0
Seattle, Wa
Visit site
MN_Gopher said:
In the CHL is so tough. Explain, Parrish, Comrie, Foy and the like. Their numbers all blew up in the CHL.

I can explain Parrish and Comrie having seen them numerous times in the WHL. They were 20 year olds who stepped right into the NHL after their WHL careers ended, they should have dominated. Parrish came to Seattle and basically stepped into Patrick Marleau's spot on a team that had gone to the WHL finals the season before. The team around him wasn't great but Parrish went on to score 24 goals the next season with the Panthers, had he played with Seattle his entire junior career I don't think he would have been around as a 20. As for Comrie he played in the WHL as leverage to get a better NHL contract out of the Oilers. He scored 59 points in 40 games at Michigan, and again he stepped straight into the NHL during the WHL season and had 22 points in 41 games. The next season he scored 33 goals in a full NHL season.

Funny you didn't throw Justin Maiser's name in there. He left BU and was probably night in and night out the worst player on Seattle as a 20 year old.

Just for my .02 cents. If a CHL team and a NCAA team played it would be close game. I work with a proud Huntsville hockey alumni and have seen them more than I ever thought I would, but you can't compare them to a junior team. I see alot of games (both CHL and NCAA) and I prefer the CHL play on a whole, does that mean I think they'd win a series, probably not but it would be a great series to watch.
 

thomasincanada

Registered User
Mar 7, 2005
1,691
0
London, ON
Sammy said:
Try using some, any logic.
Also, way to dismiss the fact that Oiler Rookies, who are older & a hell of alot better than the players on a junior team, cant beat or can barely beat the Bears.

It's clear you don't really know who the Oiler Rookies were this year. Ask any Oiler fan who their top players were in camp. They'll tell you Schremp, Pouliot and Syvret.

All three were playing junior hockey about 2 months earlier.

Since you say things that aren't true and have little to no understanding of who the rookies on the Oiler squad were, I question whether I should even be bothering to debate with you.
 
Last edited:

Sammy*

Guest
thomasincanada said:
Rob Schremp dominated the game this year and was first star. 2 months earlier he was on the second line of a junior team. Alberta couldn't handle him.

He's back playing junior again this year. Let me repeat that for you. The best player in that game is back playing junior. Apparently someone forgot to tell him the Oilers Rookies are older and a hell of a lot better than junior players. Perhaps you should go tell him.

If Rob Schremp had more of his old teammates, they'd have beaten that Alberta team without a doubt.
One player. Nice logic.
 

VOB

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,692
0
Michigan
Visit site
Zine said:
So now you're reduced to.......'well, Moncton is a better coached team' :shakehead

No, UND doesn't have 2 or 3 more offensive players...more like 5-6. And don't hype up Pineault..he didn't last in the NCAA and was left of the WJC for good reason, he was brutal for us last year.
That essentially nullifies Monctons top 2 lines.

Plus, where's this defensive depth of Monton's you talk about? Beyond Bourdon and Yandle you have Welton, MacDonald, Bartulis and Hepditch. A third rounder and 3 undrafted players?

.

Please list your offensive NoDak juggernaught. You have Stafford, Oshie, Zajak, Toews and ...? How good would Oshie be doing in the CHL? Probably as good as Pineault. What you say? Well look at Oshie's production at the WJC. His production as a 19 year old equaled Pineault's production as an 18 year old!!! How would Canada's best 1988 player do? Probably a little worse than one of the U.S. best 1988 born player...Mueller!

Jordan Leopold, Keith Ballard, Paul Martin, Rob Blake, Martin St Louis, Joe Nieuwendyk, Jason Blake, Chris Drury, Brandon Bochenski, Patrick Eaves, Marty Turco, Brendan Morrison, Antii Laaksonen, Rene Bourque, Brian Gionta, Brian Rafalski, John-Micheal Liles, Mike Grier, Tom Preissing


You are joking right?! I mean some of these guys didn't even step into the NHL from college and this is the cream of the NCAA's crop. Compare that to recent CHL grads who made the jump right to the NHL. Jason Spezza, Crosby, Staal, Horton, phaneuf, Thortnon, Gagne,Stewart, Richards, Carter, Tanguay, Nagy,Lecavalier, Nash,Stuart....and I could go on. These players all stepped into the NHL right after their CHL careers were over, many of them are the game's top players today.


Was a 19 year old Phanuef better than a 20 year old Rob Blake? HELL YEAH!

That's the thing, the better younger CHL players are everybit as good (if not better) than their slightly older NCAA counterparts.
 
Last edited:

reidy

@reidjjackson
I've been reading this thread for a few days now, and here's the conclusion I've come to;

There are some Canadian posters here who are having trouble admitting that the best level of amateur hockey may be in the States, not Canada. Being that Canada is the birthplace of hockey, this is understandable. But to think that CHL teams (who have 16 and 17 year old kids leading them in scoring) could beat NCAA teams is laughable.

With that said, the CHL is probably a better development option for the top-tier talents, because it gets them ready for the NHL at a younger age.

That's my .02 cents.
 

VOB

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,692
0
Michigan
Visit site
reidy said:
I've been reading this thread for a few days now, and here's the conclusion I've come to;

There are some Canadian posters here who are having trouble admitting that the best level of amateur hockey may be in the States, not Canada. Being that Canada is the birthplace of hockey, this is understandable. But to think that CHL teams (who have 16 and 17 year old kids leading them in scoring) could beat NCAA teams is laughable.

With that said, the CHL is probably a better development option for the top-tier talents, because it gets them ready for the NHL at a younger age.

That's my .02 cents.

First off I'm not Canadian, secondly please list for me who these 16 and 17 year old players leading their team in scoring are? Yes Crosby led his team in scoring as a 16 year old...but he would have led his NCAA team in scoring as well at the same age!

You are right about the CHL preparing top tier players for the NHL at a younger age.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->