Prospect Info: Cal Petersen (2013, 129th) – '16-17: Notre Dame #40 (NCAA)

[joshjull]

College players become dues paying NHLPA members when they sign contracts and become NHL players. If you don't think their interests are being considered by the player's association in CBA negotiations, that's just like, your opinion, man.

I'm sure the NHLPA would love nothing more than to help the owners keep control over drafted players that go to college.

 

[dotcommunism]

College players become dues paying NHLPA members when they sign contracts and become NHL players. If you don't think their interests are being considered by the player's association in CBA negotiations, that's just like, your opinion, man.

Historically, professional athletes have been perfectly willing to sell out amateurs in exchange for something that benefits them.

That said, we don't know how important of an issue this is to the owners. We also don't know to what extent the owners agree that this is an issue. If not enough owners care strongly about it, or enough owners are in favor of the system as it is now, it's not going to change regardless of how much some fans dislike it.

 

[Der Jaeger]

So an NCAA player has to play 4 seasons, reject a SPC, and then wait 3 more seasons to leave his drafting team? That's insane. CHL player doesn't sign an SPC after 2 seasons he re-enters the draft.

CHL players who don't get signed and re-enter the draft usually aren't good.

Vesey and Petersen are a lot better prospects than someone like Estephan.

 

[MayDay]

Very few players go this route. We just have our panties in bunch because of Murray trading for Vesey last season.

Owners can fix this if they want but I doubt it's a big concern for them in the grand scheme of the CBA. Because the few times college players do go UFA. The other owners get a crack at them.

I think all of the angst over this is overdone.

IMO this is likely to become a small-market vs large-market issue between owners.

The top college prospects who spurn their drafting team to go UFA are choosing to go to big markets like NYC (Vesey) and LA (Petersen). While the teams that are losing their good prospects for nothing are small markets like Nashville and Buffalo.

 

[dotcommunism]

CHL players who don't get signed and re-enter the draft usually aren't good.

Vesey and Petersen are a lot better prospects than someone like Estephan.

Vesey in his second year at Harvard had 22 points in 31 games. He didn't break out until his third season. Petersen in his freshman year at Notre Dame (his second post-draft season) had a .919 save percentage. Not bad by any means, but not what he did the next two seasons.

Really, I think, that's the argument for keeping the rules they way they are. CHLers go back into the draft instead of becoming UFAs, but teams only hold their rights for two years. NCAAers' rights are held for longer, but if they opt not to sign, they can become free agents. European players' rights are held for longer too, but there's always a bigger risk of European players not coming over. There are trade offs involved with players' rights being held for longer. Why should NHL clubs be able to have their cake and eat it too when it comes to NCAA players?

 

[Der Jaeger]

Vesey in his second year at Harvard had 22 points in 31 games. He didn't break out until his third season. Petersen in his freshman year at Notre Dame (his second post-draft season) had a .919 save percentage. Not bad by any means, but not what he did the next two seasons.

Really, I think, that's the argument for keeping the rules they way they are. CHLers go back into the draft instead of becoming UFAs, but teams only hold their rights for two years. NCAAers' rights are held for longer, but if they opt not to sign, they can become free agents. European players' rights are held for longer too, but there's always a bigger risk of European players not coming over. There are trade offs involved with players' rights being held for longer. Why should NHL clubs be able to have their cake and eat it too when it comes to NCAA players?

It's a risk teams take with NCAA players, and I do appreciate that owners wanted the additional developmental years which add a lot of benefits.

If I were an owner, I wouldn't want to see player my organization helped develop go play elsewhere. Imagine Nashville with Vesey.

Re: teams getting cake and eating it too. They pay the contracts to kids who just got a free education.

 

[joshjull]

It's a risk teams take with NCAA players, and I do appreciate that owners wanted the additional developmental years which add a lot of benefits.

If I were an owner, I wouldn't want to see player my organization helped develop go play elsewhere. Imagine Nashville with Vesey.

Re: teams getting cake and eating it too. They pay the contracts to kids who just got a free education.

But thats just it.... They didn't develop them. The college they played for did and did it at no cost to the NHL team that drafted them. Thats kind of the point.


Vesey is different than most because I think he intended to go 4 years and into free agency from the get go. I think his brother has said something similar

 

[sabresfan129103]

Seems strange that he would sign with LA, but meh whatever. I knew from the beginning of last season he had no intention of signing with us. I also think Borgen is gonna be the next one they lose.

 

[joshjull]

IMO this is likely to become a small-market vs large-market issue between owners.

The top college prospects who spurn their drafting team to go UFA are choosing to go to big markets like NYC (Vesey) and (LA). While the teams that are losing their good prospects for nothing are small markets like Nashville and Buffalo.

I don't think its that really. Vesey went to play with a good friend (Hayes) and Petersen went to a situation that sets up very well for him with little behind Quick.

 

[joshjull]

We have a GM who had a big hand in the Pens revamping their development model several years ago. Part of that was tapping into the college talent pool a lot whether via the draft or as free agent signings. Our GM believes on balance using the college talent pool brings much more positives than negatives.

Using the college talent pool will be a good experience going forward. You just have to expect some bumps along the way.

 

[MayDay]

But thats just it.... They didn't develop them. The college they played for did and did it at no cost to the NHL team that drafted them. Thats kind of the point.

I don't know about "no cost." I'm sure that teams expend resources (in scouts' and coaches' time) in tracking and communicating with their prospects in NCAA. Plus they go to Dev Camps and things like that. That's time and resources spent.

Plus there are other types of costs. Petersen probably cost the Sabres the opportunity to better address their goaltending depth over the last few years, since it wouldn't have been as much of a perceived need owning the rights to a goalie prospect of his caliber. That's called "opportunity cost."

 

[ZZamboni]

Maybe I'm alone here, but I just find the dramatic butt hurt over Cal not signing with us rather immature. I mean to hope he fails because he uses his RIGHT to sign where he wants. Yea. Just illogical immaturity. Same garbage was spewed when Vesey didn't sign. Good grief padawans.

 

[NotABadPeriod]

Maybe I'm alone here, but I just find the dramatic butt hurt over Cal not signing with us rather immature. I mean to hope he fails because he uses his RIGHT to sign where he wants. Yea. Just illogical immaturity. Same garbage was spewed when Vesey didn't sign. Good grief padawans.

I hope the Sabres sign someone who went UFA just to hear the justification for why that was OK. Imagine if they signed Butcher for instance later this summer...

 

[JThorne]

Hoping for a repeat of this game when the Sabres hopefully/eventually face him:





And hopefully every team who lost a player in this fashion within the past year of this being rectified gets compensation of some sort.

I was at this game! So much fun. Was near my birthday and a good friend took me as a present.

 

[Paxon]

Maybe I'm alone here, but I just find the dramatic butt hurt over Cal not signing with us rather immature. I mean to hope he fails because he uses his RIGHT to sign where he wants. Yea. Just illogical immaturity. Same garbage was spewed when Vesey didn't sign. Good grief padawans.

It's sports. There's not really a bad reason for rooting against a player who isn't on your team. Granted, a lot of bitterness is apparent with some, which isn't really warranted. Petersen is not an elite prospect. He's a good prospect. It's not a major blow.

 

[Dingo44]

I hope he's getting shelled in Manchester in two years on the rare occasion he gets a start.

 

[joshjull]

I don't know about "no cost." I'm sure that teams expend resources (in scouts' and coaches' time) in tracking and communicating with their prospects in NCAA. Plus they go to Dev Camps and things like that. That's time and resources spent.

Teams spend nothing to develop NCAA prospects. Compared to CHL players who get a ELC its nothing. We just got done paying Kea, Dupuy and Austin 200k or so each over their ELCs and we didn't qualify them. So we are getting nothing out of them from the development we paid for.

Btw college players have to foot the bill to attend a development camp per NCAA rules.

Plus there are other types of costs. Petersen probably cost the Sabres the opportunity to better address their goaltending depth over the last few years, since it wouldn't have been as much of a perceived need owning the rights to a goalie prospect of his caliber. That's called "opportunity cost."

This doesn't even make sense. If we had depth issues in the organization in net the last couple years (As in NHL, AHL and ECHL). Petersen couldn't address them since he wasn't under contract. If you're talking in the pipeline that doesn't make sense either since nothing would stop us from drafting other goalies.

EDIT: Lets keep in mind we added Lehner and Kasdorf in a trades and drafted Johnson while we had Peterson in the fold. We hardly sat pat waiting for him.

 

[Paxon]

CHL players who don't get signed and re-enter the draft usually aren't good.

Vesey and Petersen are a lot better prospects than someone like Estephan.

Like dotcommunism says, we aren't sure where someone like Estephan will be in a year or two just as we don't know in years 1 and 2 where a Vesey will be at in a year 3 or 4. Teams can try to sign collegr guys in years 1 and 2. Players don't have to listen, but they often do. Girgensons did, for example. But teams see the value in letting them develop elsewhere while their team evaluates their future. Those advantages come with a risk, just as signing a prospect 1 or 2 seasons after their draft carries the risk of a wasted contract spot.

 

[Paxon]

I don't know about "no cost." I'm sure that teams expend resources (in scouts' and coaches' time) in tracking and communicating with their prospects in NCAA. Plus they go to Dev Camps and things like that. That's time and resources spent.

Plus there are other types of costs. Petersen probably cost the Sabres the opportunity to better address their goaltending depth over the last few years, since it wouldn't have been as much of a perceived need owning the rights to a goalie prospect of his caliber. That's called "opportunity cost."

The Sabres shouldn't have considered Petersen money in the bank and I doubt they did. They knew he could walk. They also know you need several goalie prospects if you want an eventual NHL starter.

 

[NotABadPeriod]

Like dotcommunism says, we aren't sure where someone like Estephan will be in a year or two just as we don't know in years 1 and 2 where a Vesey will be at in a year 3 or 4. Teams can try to sign collegr guys in years 1 and 2. Players don't have to listen, but they often do. Girgensons did, for example. But teams see the value in letting them develop elsewhere while their team evaluates their future. Those advantages come with a risk, just as signing a prospect 1 or 2 seasons after their draft carries the risk of a wasted contract spot.

Exactly.

If you had an extra 2 years before needing to sign a guy like Kea or Colin Jacobs, you'd make a much better choice.

It should be noted that drafting a guy from Europe poses exactly the same UFA risk as college guys. Victor Olofsson could certainly decide he doesn't want to sign with the Sabres, wait until the rights expire, and then sign with whichever NHL team he can agree to a contract with. But nobody talks about that loophole...

 

[Baccus]

But the reason that this needs to be rectified is that this was not the intent of this clause of the CBA. This was intended to free prospects whose rights were owned by teams who had no interest in signing them, so they are not stuck in a place with no path forward. It was NOT intended to give prospects a mechanism to reject the team that drafted them and wants them and actively tries to sign them and develop them.

It's exploiting a CBA provision for a purpose for which it wasn't intended, which is the exact definition of the word "loophole." And it's a loophole that needs to be closed.

Maybe the answer is compensatory draft picks. Or maybe something else. But something has to be done.

UFA after 4 years is the SPECIFIC intent of the rule. It's literally spelled out. It's the opposite of a loophole, there is no exploit. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it one.

People really feel the need for compensation on a 5th round pick 4 years later? Give me a goddamn break. 1st rounders who go UFA get a believe a 3rd round as compensation, so on that scale at best we'd be due a 7th rounder, I'm sure that would satisfy the braying masses.

Anyway, I look forward to the next NCAA kid who receives absolutely nothing from the team that drafted him to go UFA so everybody can cry about it again. Great entertainment, second only to the random predictions that every NCAA kid is going to stay in school 2-3 extra years losing money so they can eventually hit UFA and still get the same ELC deal.

 

[La Cosa Nostra]

Gotta love the semantics showed by the pro union/player rights people here who are behind Cal Petersens decision to spurn us. Fine , let's say it doesn't cost the Sabres money for him going the ncaa route. What it did cost us was a draft pick and time (the most valuable commodity). That draft pick could have been used on someone else and we did waste time wondering about a player who never ended up signing here. If we knew from the very start he was going to **** us over maybe we would have targeted a different goalie to replace him instead of waiting around. Petersen is a quality goalie prospect. We thought we had a potential starter in the fold. Instead he spurned us and we lost one of our best goalies in the system. The same posters who support his decision and wish him well should also support the posters here who are wishing he fails. Same exact concept.

And no it is not fair that quality prospects screw over small market teams like Nashville and Buffalo to help out teams in the two biggest sport markets in the world in Los Angeles and New York.

 

[Baccus]

Gotta love the semantics showed by the pro union/player rights people here who are behind Cal Petersens decision to spurn us. Fine , let's say it doesn't cost the Sabres money for him going the ncaa route. What it did cost us was a draft pick and time (the most valuable commodity). That draft pick could have been used on someone else and we did waste time wondering about a player who never ended up signing here. If we knew from the very start he was going to **** us over maybe we would have targeted a different goalie to replace him instead of waiting around. Petersen is a quality goalie prospect. We thought we had a potential starter in the fold. Instead he spurned us and we lost one of our best goalies in the system. The same posters who support his decision and wish him well should also support the posters here who are wishing he fails. Same exact concept.

And no it is not fair that quality prospects screw over small market teams like Nashville and Buffalo to help out teams in the two biggest sport markets in the world in Los Angeles and New York.

Nobody is arguing semantics, you're just crying about something.

I think it sucks he didn't sign with the Sabres. What I think has zero relevance to the rules of the CBA.

The Sabres made a draft choice. That choice comes with a sunk cost. There is a specific advantage to drafting NCAA kids who cost zero in actual dollars vs CHL players who you need to make a decision on in 2 years. That advantage also comes with the loss of leverage in the 4th year. Welcome to reality.

He doesn't owe anybody anything, and you're just crying about it in your mr fanboi persona you spew into hoping players turn into busts or whatever because of it. I don't wish players to fail or anything, because I'm not a raging *******.

Top end teams and major cities will always have an advantage in signing UFA players just based on either team quality or quality of life. They also generally have tax and cost of living disadvantages, which of course you ignore because it doesn't fit your two-bit hot take.

 

[Husko]

I hold no ill will toward Petersen, wish him all the best.

I hope the next CBA changes the rule a bit.

Don't think any of it is a huge deal.

 

[ZZamboni]

Nobody is arguing semantics, you're just crying about something.

I think it sucks he didn't sign with the Sabres. What I think has zero relevance to the rules of the CBA.

The Sabres made a draft choice. That choice comes with a sunk cost. There is a specific advantage to drafting NCAA kids who cost zero in actual dollars vs CHL players who you need to make a decision on in 2 years. That advantage also comes with the loss of leverage in the 4th year. Welcome to reality.

He doesn't owe anybody anything, and you're just crying about it in your mr fanboi persona you spew into hoping players turn into busts or whatever because of it. I don't wish players to fail or anything, because I'm not a raging *******.

Top end teams and major cities will always have an advantage in signing UFA players just based on either team quality or quality of life. They also generally have tax and cost of living disadvantages, which of course you ignore because it doesn't fit your two-bit hot take.

I hold no ill will toward Petersen, wish him all the best.

I hope the next CBA changes the rule a bit.

Don't think any of it is a huge deal.

Yes and yes. Both well said. That's why I think it's just so man-boy rage and quite immature. Every team has the equal risk. Every team has gotten "burned" or "risked" the draft pick on a player who ultimately didn't sign. Stomp feet and cross arms doesn't make it any better so why do it? I hope the rules get changed a little.