OHL poised to lose a TON of talent to USHL/BCHL, CHL is sweating bullets.

[MeHateHe]

The instances of a player actually being too good for juniors are extremely rare, and in all of those cases, the players were most definately good enough to play an important role in the NHL.

In previous threads about this sub-topic, I've asked for examples of players whose development was harmed/slowed/derailed by playing against their peers. I can think of one possible example: Shane Wright, and I'm not sure it's a very good example.

Players who are good enough to play in the NHL should play in the NHL. Players who aren't are not very likely to gain much by going to the meatgrinder that is the AHL (or worse, the ECHL). If folks can come up with real examples of players who were actually harmed by the current system, I'd be happy to engage on that conversation.

 

[Fixed to Ruin]

In previous threads about this sub-topic, I've asked for examples of players whose development was harmed/slowed/derailed by playing against their peers. I can think of one possible example: Shane Wright, and I'm not sure it's a very good example.

Players who are good enough to play in the NHL should play in the NHL. Players who aren't are not very likely to gain much by going to the meatgrinder that is the AHL (or worse, the ECHL). If folks can come up with real examples of players who were actually harmed by the current system, I'd be happy to engage on that conversation.

I don't disagree with your post but

Nino Neiderreider was the name that came to mind.

Also i remember watching Luc Bourdon once he got returned from Vancouver and he was going at like 50% effort and was still the best dman on the ice by a country mile.

Those would be a couple of examples since I am unintentionally playing devils advocate here.

 

[joestevens29]

I think people are over looking the fact these tenders and “commitments” aren’t worth the paper they are printed on. Will most of these players play in the OHL/CHL? Probably not. Are there a number of players using these commits to avoid teams they don’t want to play for and push their way to certain teams in the “draft”? Also likely.

Certain teams in the OHL flip these “committed” kids at a pretty decent rate. All comes down to where the kid wants to develop.

Why wouldn't first round picks stick with their team though?

 

[joestevens29]

In previous threads about this sub-topic, I've asked for examples of players whose development was harmed/slowed/derailed by playing against their peers. I can think of one possible example: Shane Wright, and I'm not sure it's a very good example.

Players who are good enough to play in the NHL should play in the NHL. Players who aren't are not very likely to gain much by going to the meatgrinder that is the AHL (or worse, the ECHL). If folks can come up with real examples of players who were actually harmed by the current system, I'd be happy to engage on that conversation.

How can you prove that players going to the AHL wouldn't have their development sped up as they are challenged at a younger age to be better?

 

[MeHateHe]

I don't disagree with your post but

Nino Neiderreider was the name that came to mind.

Also i remember watching Luc Bourdon once he got returned from Vancouver and he was going at like 50% effort and was still the best dman on the ice by a country mile.

Those would be a couple of examples since I am unintentionally playing devils advocate here.

Setting aside the Bourdon one (because we'll never really know) can you tease out how you think Niederreiter's development was harmed by playing a second season in Portland? I didn't follow his career closely enough, so I'm just going on stats. Looks like he spent most of his first pro season in Long Island, where he clearly struggled before being sent to Bridgeport, where he spent the full 2012-2013 season.

So I'll agree that he needed a year in the minors to get him up to speed. And I'll agree it was a bad idea to have him with the Islanders in his 19-year-old season. I'm not sure he wouldn't have benefited to go back to Portland instead of being used sparingly in Long Island. I don't see the proof that he would have been worse than he turned out to be by going back to Portland.

So, maybe? I just don't see proof. It's probably easier to find examples of players who did go back to junior for the 19-year-old season and use them as examples of delayed development, which is why I cited Shane Wright as a possible example.

 

[MeHateHe]

How can you prove that players going to the AHL wouldn't have their development sped up as they are challenged at a younger age to be better?

I'm open to hear examples of players who went back to junior at 19 and regressed or had their development delayed.

A lot depends on what the player needs. The AHL is a meat grinder, and it seems to me that the biggest benefit players get there is understanding pro systems. I'm not sure they have the ability to be better hockey players.

We're talking about systems and systems by their nature will not suit everyone equally. The concept of playing with your peers is ultimately sound for the vast majority of players. I'd be a lot more open to hearing a need for change if there were obvious examples of players who have had their development harmed by it, but I'm not seeing it.

 

[landy92mack29]

Setting aside the Bourdon one (because we'll never really know) can you tease out how you think Niederreiter's development was harmed by playing a second season in Portland? I didn't follow his career closely enough, so I'm just going on stats. Looks like he spent most of his first pro season in Long Island, where he clearly struggled before being sent to Bridgeport, where he spent the full 2012-2013 season.

So I'll agree that he needed a year in the minors to get him up to speed. And I'll agree it was a bad idea to have him with the Islanders in his 19-year-old season. I'm not sure he wouldn't have benefited to go back to Portland instead of being used sparingly in Long Island. I don't see the proof that he would have been worse than he turned out to be by going back to Portland.

So, maybe? I just don't see proof. It's probably easier to find examples of players who did go back to junior for the 19-year-old season and use them as examples of delayed development, which is why I cited Shane Wright as a possible example.

both examples he used are pretty bad because it's not like they dominated juniors, someone being lazy is on them for not getting better. Sure didn't hurt Stankoven "dominating" the WHL last year. NHL teams being dumb and keeping players in the NHL who shouldn't be is on them


And yeah the AHL isn't really a development league it's a adjustment league. Teenagers should be focused on getting better at skating, shooting, in the gym, etc instead of just trying to survive and stay in the lineup

 

[Fixed to Ruin]

Setting aside the Bourdon one (because we'll never really know) can you tease out how you think Niederreiter's development was harmed by playing a second season in Portland? I didn't follow his career closely enough, so I'm just going on stats. Looks like he spent most of his first pro season in Long Island, where he clearly struggled before being sent to Bridgeport, where he spent the full 2012-2013 season.

So I'll agree that he needed a year in the minors to get him up to speed. And I'll agree it was a bad idea to have him with the Islanders in his 19-year-old season. I'm not sure he wouldn't have benefited to go back to Portland instead of being used sparingly in Long Island. I don't see the proof that he would have been worse than he turned out to be by going back to Portland.

So, maybe? I just don't see proof. It's probably easier to find examples of players who did go back to junior for the 19-year-old season and use them as examples of delayed development, which is why I cited Shane Wright as a possible example.

Like i said I don't really disagree with you. If i remember correctly the reason Neiderreider stayed on long island was the belief he wasn't going to improve in Portland and thus the Islanders kept him when in reality he should have been in the minors.

Another example that came to mind was Seth Jarvis who because of Covid got an exemption to play in the AHL for a handful of games where he was among the leading scorers and over a PPG for that short period of time before returning to the WHL when they started back up.

 

[WarriorofTime]

In previous threads about this sub-topic, I've asked for examples of players whose development was harmed/slowed/derailed by playing against their peers. I can think of one possible example: Shane Wright, and I'm not sure it's a very good example.

Players who are good enough to play in the NHL should play in the NHL. Players who aren't are not very likely to gain much by going to the meatgrinder that is the AHL (or worse, the ECHL). If folks can come up with real examples of players who were actually harmed by the current system, I'd be happy to engage on that conversation.

You’re asking for something that is impossible to prove. Anyways the new trend is to prematurely put a kid in the NHL since they can’t go to the AHL and they don’t want them going back to juniors. Kevin Korchinski and Zach Benson are examples this season. Of course that only applies if the team isn’t in a Stanley Cup competing window.

 

[Fixed to Ruin]

both examples he used are pretty bad because it's not like they dominated juniors

If your scoring 60/70 pts at 17/18 years old then your dominant in jrs.

If your at the 100 pts+ your in Bedard territory and those aren't the guys were talking about in these examples

 

[WarriorofTime]

We're talking about systems and systems by their nature will not suit everyone equally. The concept of playing with your peers is ultimately sound for the vast majority of players.

That’s kind of the point. lol. It should be an individual matter that should apply for individuals and not a decision that applies for the “vast majority” of players. These are 18 and 19 year old adults. There’s fundamental unfairness at play.

Think another way, the vast majority of 18 year olds aren’t ready for the NHL. Nowhere close. But there’s nothing systemically preventing them from being there so when a Crosby, McDavid or Bedard comes around they aren’t blocked by a nanny state that tells them this is what’s better for fifth round picks so it’s better for them as well.

Why would teams willingly burn a year of ELC (and pay a transfer fee) for players that aren’t ready for the AHL to go into the AHL? The vast majority would still get sent back to juniors. This is and has always been about the exceptions.

 

[bcspragu]

Why wouldn't first round picks stick with their team though?

In which context? First round tenders? Or first round CHL picks?

 

[landy92mack29]

That’s kind of the point. lol. It should be an individual matter that should apply for individuals and not a decision that applies for the “vast majority” of players. These are 18 and 19 year old adults. There’s fundamental unfairness at play.

Think another way, the vast majority of 18 year olds aren’t ready for the NHL. Nowhere close. But there’s nothing systemically preventing them from being there so when a Crosby, McDavid or Bedard comes around they aren’t blocked by a nanny state that tells them this is what’s better for fifth round picks so it’s better for them as well.

Why would teams willingly burn a year of ELC (and pay a transfer fee) for players that aren’t ready for the AHL to go into the AHL? The vast majority would still get sent back to juniors. This is and has always been about the exceptions.

Except there's nothing blocking the Crosby, McDavid, Bedards because they're in the nhl...or Mackinnon, Tkachuk, Ekblad, Tavares, etc

If you're under 20 in the AHL your elc slides also as long as you don't play 10 or more nhl games

If your scoring 60/70 pts at 17/18 years old then your dominant in jrs.

If your at the 100 pts+ your in Bedard territory and those aren't the guys were talking about in these examples

as a 2way defenseman sure but as a forward ppg is solid but no where near dominating.

 

[MeHateHe]

Sure didn't hurt Stankoven "dominating" the WHL last year. NHL teams being dumb and keeping players in the NHL who shouldn't be is on them

Yeah, Stankhoven's a good example of a player who was absolutely not held back by another year in junior.

And I'm with you that mismanaging players is the fault of the clubs, not the agreement. I'm of the opinion that this is a benefit to the clubs because in addition to saving them from themselves, it reduces the likelihood of a bottleneck of prospects in the AHL. In the end, the agreement has a lot more benefits than costs.

 

[Sparty]

Hope they enjoy it now. As soon as the NCAA starts allowing CHL players to play college hockey, those feeder leagues won't be getting these players. At least not like this. The CHL will be where you go 16-19 and if you aren't signed you go to the NCAA 20-22/23.

What do kids in the CHL do when they have graduated from HS and are still eligible to play in CHL? Do they just play in CHL and do nothing else? Take classes at a local college? Work part time jobs? I know they probably all make different decisions, but I just have always wondered.

I don't really see how it's fair for CHL players to start their NCAA careers when they're 20 years old and then play until they're 24/25 years old, but I feel like it's eventually gonna happen.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Yeah, Stankhoven's a good example of a player who was absolutely not held back by another year in junior.

And I'm with you that mismanaging players is the fault of the clubs, not the agreement. I'm of the opinion that this is a benefit to the clubs because in addition to saving them from themselves, it reduces the likelihood of a bottleneck of prospects in the AHL. In the end, the agreement has a lot more benefits than costs.

This is more nanny state stuff. Teams put their European prospects in the AHL for age 18 or 19 if they are ready but can’t for kids drafted out of CHL. What’s so different or special about their situation? Nothing.. The bottleneck is exactly why you won’t see a big change overnight. If it’s good for five players then it should be different for those five players.

 

[Kingpin794]

What do kids in the CHL do when they have graduated from HS and are still eligible to play in CHL? Do they just play in CHL and do nothing else? Take classes at a local college? Work part time jobs? I know they probably all make different decisions, but I just have always wondered.

I don't really see how it's fair for CHL players to start their NCAA careers when they're 20 years old and then play until they're 24/25 years old, but I feel like it's eventually gonna happen.

Yeah they take college classes usually from a local school. Otherwise they train/practice. Sometimes go out to the communities for events. It’s very much suppose to mimic being a pro.

The NCAA is already a men’s league. The majority of players are in that 20-22 age range. Not a ton of 18 year olds out there (unless they are first round talents) and even most 19 year olds aren’t dominating college hockey.

 

[Oak]

The demographics of hockey are changing as well. It's not really a "blue collar" sport anymore.

Hasn't been blue collar for a while now bud.

 

[StreetHawk]

Is being able to play in the ahl as a teenager a big selling point? I mean most ncaa kids don’t leave college and spend a year in the A in what would be their sophomore season do they? I recall Connor did but he put up 70 points as a freshman with Michigan.

If freshmen leave college after the season it’s to play in the nhl not ahl in what is to be their sophomore year.

 

[WarriorofTime]

’

Is being able to play in the ahl as a teenager a big selling point?

No that’s a sidebar topic. Not many kids leave school after their age 18 season and if they do it’s usually not with the intent of playing in the AHL. After age 19 is more common for first round and well performing second round talent.

 

[StreetHawk]

’
No that’s a sidebar topic. Not many kids leave school after their age 18 season and if they do it’s usually not with the intent of playing in the AHL. After age 19 is more common for first round and well performing second round talent.

NCAA kids would leave after they have excelled in college. Be it after a sophomore or junior year. Some know they have to go to the AHL, but given that they have excelled in college it’s time to take the next step up in competition.

 

[WarriorofTime]

NCAA kids would leave after they have excelled in college. Be it after a sophomore or junior year. Some know they have to go to the AHL, but given that they have excelled in college it’s time to take the next step up in competition.

Yes an appeal of college is you can enter (18, 19, 20, 21) and exit (one, two, three or four years) when you are ready

 

[HawksDub89]

In previous threads about this sub-topic, I've asked for examples of players whose development was harmed/slowed/derailed by playing against their peers. I can think of one possible example: Shane Wright, and I'm not sure it's a very good example.

Players who are good enough to play in the NHL should play in the NHL. Players who aren't are not very likely to gain much by going to the meatgrinder that is the AHL (or worse, the ECHL). If folks can come up with real examples of players who were actually harmed by the current system, I'd be happy to engage on that conversation.

How on earth is anyone suppose to prove that? Lol

The entire premise is that the player is clearly too good for JR. It’s not rocket science to suggest a slight increase in competition could be better for development than playing against 16-17 year olds you’ve already proven to be better than.

This isn’t complicated, stop trying so hard to make it complicated.

 

[Bubbles]

Tell me you know nothing about the subject without telling me you know nothing about the subject.

Others have answered for me, so I'll just put you on the ignore list.

But this is not going to lead to a flood of players abandoning the CHL, which everyone can see is still churning out talent. This is not going to lead to the death of the AJHL or SJHL, as someone posited, nor will it make a marked difference on the quality play on the long run. The three CHL leagues are still attracting top recruits and young players (and their agents) are still going to see that and want to go there.

At the end of the day, you have a firehose of players coming out of minor hockey looking for a place to play. The suggestion that all the top talent are going to end of playing for the Chicago Steel is ludicrous. When Sidney Crosby went to Shattuck, everyone talked about how this was the most fierce condemnation of Canadian elite minor hockey and made the same declarations.

A few folks here have an obvious axe to grind with the CHL and with Hockey Canada, and both those institutions are going to have to adapt to make their programs more attractive, but whatever. The junior hockey landscape is wildly in flux. Save your declarations for a few years after things have settled.

You're probably referring to me, as I said the AJHL won't have much of a future without 3 of its biggest teams leaving. I answered you in the business thread but you ignored it so I'll answer you here. Without Brooks, Sherwood Park or Okotoks, the AJHL takes a massive dive in talent. Why would higher level recruits go down to a watered down Junior A league, when the best teams are all in the BCHL and where the college scouts are going to find players? It's just plain logic.

I also said before that when the BCHL first left HC, the top Alberta teams would join eventually. I think you or someone else doubted that would happen.

I guess you want to ignore facts and ignore how Owen Power, Adam Fantilli and Jaydeon Perron all went to the Steel. And I guess you forgot that Misa was tendered to the Steel before he was granted ES.

The BCHL has at least kept most of their homegrown stars in the province instead of them going to the Steel or some other USHL powerhouse. I don't see Ontario doing anything to make Junior A hockey viable in their home province, and are more than content to let guys like Power and Fantilli go to the states. The BCHL has at least kept guys like Johnson, Wood and Nadeau in Canada.

 

[Bubbles]

If the winds are indeed turning against the CHL, the BCHL will undoubtedly begin to acquire some of the best Canadian talent. If so, how does Hockey Canada reconcile with the BCHL because if they cannot come to some agreement, Canada could very well miss out on some of their finest talent for various tournaments.

It would be somewhat ironic if Hockey Canada actively pushes their players towards the U.S. in order for those players to be available for tournaments.

Of course this will most likely all be moot in the very near future as the NCAA is set to drop the CHL restrictions.

I think there's a misconception on this board here. The goal of the BCHL is not necessarily the best prospects for the NHL, but the best prospects for COLLEGE hockey. The league is more interested in becoming the best feeder league other than the USHL. If it just so happens they succeed as NHL players than great, but they recruit for that more.

The new proposed ruling only concerns CHL players that have aged out (20 plus), it does not affect draft eligible players. In essence, colleges can recruit overage players freely. That ruling only hurts USports and has nothing to with Junior A or the BCHL.