League ranking?? WHL/OHL/AHL/QMJHL/NCAA

[toastman344*]

why the heck is anyone comparing a group of 15 year old kids ( or for that matter 16-20 year olds ) to a college team?

Because many Yanks seem to need to compare apples to oranges...in order to maintain the myth that their young ( mostly NCAA ) prospects are as good or better than our ( mostly CHL ) kids...

In truly Best on Best competitions, at the same age level, and likewise in terms of their NHL careers that Myth gets busted...time and again...

Yet they continue to argue the point...in the face of all available evidence...to the contrary

 

[MN_Gopher]

why the heck is anyone comparing a group of 15 year old kids to a college team?

The point is at what age did the current NHL all stars surpass everyone in the league. It was not from birth. Its obviuos that the NCAA is older. So at what age did all these NHLers from the CHL surpass the older generations. It was not at 15. its going over the top to make a point. So the point is at at 21 vs 19. The average ages of a few teams. Is that 2 years difference alone makes a huge difference. The age difference alone. What a body can handle on its joints which = core strength. Experiance is self explanitory. That little bit of devolpment is huge. Enough to make a simple 2 year age difference a big deal. So when you toss in the same amount of drafted players x=x there. And 21>19 i do not know how that point is not getting across and instead is getting twisted.

 

[MN_Gopher]

Idiot?

I am not comapring 15 year old prep players (Toews and Esposito were) to college kids....you are

Crosby at 16 could have easily played in the NCAA against 24 year old slugs from AA and done well.

The problem is that you do not have comparable talent in the NCAA to the CHL. You have a few stacked teams in maybe three conferences and then a huge drop off in depth.

The Soo Greyhounds this year could have easily played against LSSU, Ferris, B.G. Tech and even Northern Michigan....but then again you wouldn't know because you probably only saw one of those teams I mentioned.

Plymouth can easily play with MSU....again you wouldn't know because you have never seen Plymouth play and only saw MSU on T.V.

Go back to reading your glossy magazines in the bathroom and watch who you call an idiot goofer fan!

First off i apologize for calling you an idiot. That was wrong and it was uncalled for.

But we have gone through drafted players for drafted players. You have to tell me that the average CHL who is younger and undrafted. Is not only better than his older counterpart in the NCAA but is good enough to make up the age difference. That i cannot agree with. Expecially with the top NCAA teams. Its not like its 5 teams. I would call, BU, BC, NH, Maine, Mich, Mich St, MN, ND, DU, CC, WI, all premier programs. And the likes of SCSU, NotreDame, Clarkson, Mass, Miami all only a good string away from that list. ALmost 20 teams. Yes it is top heavy. But its not only a few teams.

But the really reason this will never go anywhere in the long run is the fans. If i was not pationate about my gophers. Paying sometimes 200% to a scalper for stading room only tickets. And many more fans. The prgram would look bad and the atmosphere would fade. Revenue would go down and the facilities would falter. Making it hard to entice talent. Just as you and many more come out and support juniors to make it appealing.

 

[MN_Gopher]

Because many Yanks seem to need to compare apples to oranges...in order to maintain the myth that their young ( mostly NCAA ) prospects are as good or better than our ( mostly CHL ) kids...

In truly Best on Best competitions, at the same age level, and likewise in terms of their NHL careers that Myth gets busted...time and again...

Yet they continue to argue the point...in the face of all available evidence...to the contrary

Its not the same age that is the point. Its when there is a very obvious age difference. The top NCAA teams can match any CHL team talent for talent. So the difference makers are the 2-4th lines and the 3-6 defensemen. Which are older, going by genetics they can hold more muscle mass. Making them stronger. People like to say the CHL is bigger. I'd much rather have a sub 6 foot 20 year old vs a 6 4 18 year old. Its a matter of body function at that point. The shorter older player is more coordinated and actually stronger. They can add mass faster, more strength and be able to applt it due to there limbs not growing. Add in the way the body burns calories vs a growing body vs a fully mature body and its clear.

 

[MN_Gopher]

why the heck is anyone comparing a group of 15 year old kids to a college team?

The first point was the CHL is better because it has more players in the NHL. I used SSM as an example. In 10 years they will have way more NHLers than the Alaska team form the NCAA. But if they played this year. Who would win? AA wins hands down. So why are future acoldaes indicative of how they are better in any given year. It is not. So using future NHLers in not a measuring stick to how well those teams were in the past.

 

[jc tremblay jnr]

This usually leads to passionate debates but I'm always interested to read people's opinions on this. From what I understand from the stereotypes.

The WHL, QMJHL, and OHL are part of a bigger association known as the CHL or Canadian Junior League. This is the major or highest level of juniors in North America and what people are referring too when they talk about "juniors". There's also other smaller but notable junior leagues out there such as the BCHL or British Columbia Hockey League.

WHL - Defensive tough league with a emphasis on strong defensive play. A lot of decent defenseman, grinders, and occasionally strong offensive players come of the Dub.

Notable Graduates - Jarome Ignila, Dion Phaneuf

QMJHL - Offense first league with a emphasis on the run and gun. A lot of high scoring players come out of this league

Notable Graduates - Mario Lemeuix, Sidney Crosby

OHL - All-Around League. I honestly don't know much about the OHL but I guess it's reputation is that it's solid for it's all around play.

Notable Graduates - I'm not sure

AHL - The AHL is the minor leagues for NHL teams. Players who aren't yet ready for the NHL or who aren't good enough for the NHL get sent there.

Notable Graduates: Olaf Kolzig, Brett Hull

NCAA - From what I understand the NCAA is very much like the NHL game. NCAA prospects have a little bit of stigma to them because they usually take an extra year or two from players in juniors to join their NHL team's systems. NCAA is noted for having a game very much like the NHL. I believe NCAA players can't play in the CHL so a lot smaller leagues like the BCHL feed into the NCAA. Players who have a stronger desire for a solid education usually go this route.

Notable Graduates: Brendan Morrison, Martin St. Louis

 

[jc tremblay jnr]

This usually leads to passionate debates but I'm always interested to read people's opinions on this. From what I understand from the stereotypes.

The WHL, QMJHL, and OHL are part of a bigger association known as the CHL or Canadian Junior League. This is the major or highest level of juniors in North America and what people are referring too when they talk about "juniors". There's also other smaller but notable junior leagues out there such as the BCHL or British Columbia Hockey League.

WHL - Defensive tough league with a emphasis on strong defensive play. A lot of decent defenseman, grinders, and occasionally strong offensive players come of the Dub.

Notable Graduates - Jarome Ignila, Dion Phaneuf

QMJHL - Offense first league with a emphasis on the run and gun. A lot of high scoring players come out of this league

Notable Graduates - Mario Lemeuix, Sidney Crosby

OHL - All-Around League. I honestly don't know much about the OHL but I guess it's reputation is that it's solid for it's all around play.

Notable Graduates - I'm not sure

AHL - The AHL is the minor leagues for NHL teams. Players who aren't yet ready for the NHL or who aren't good enough for the NHL get sent there.

Notable Graduates: Olaf Kolzig, Brett Hull

NCAA - From what I understand the NCAA is very much like the NHL game. NCAA prospects have a little bit of stigma to them because they usually take an extra year or two from players in juniors to join their NHL team's systems. NCAA is noted for having a game very much like the NHL. I believe NCAA players can't play in the CHL so a lot smaller leagues like the BCHL feed into the NCAA. Players who have a stronger desire for a solid education usually go this route.

Notable Graduates: Brendan Morrison, Martin St. Louis

some OHL players in NHL are jeff carter/ corey perry/ staal bros/ chris stewart/ john david son/ john taveres [youngest player to be drafted at age 14]

there are more but i wold have to go thru rosters
i operated video cam for OHL for 10 years & now doing WHL for 8
& i remember seeing these guys play

 

[Bonin21]

This thread hurts my brain.

Of course the AHL is the best league mentioned. Shouldn't even be in the discussion. NCAA teams would beat CHL head to head easily because the players are older as many mentioned. The top NCAA teams have more draft picks than all but one or two CHL teams because there are so many CHL teams.

The ageless question is:
Is going USHS/USHL -> NCAA better than CHL for your development and chances of making the NHL? The answer is they're both great. If you're a surefire top five draft pick that is going to go straight to the show, usually you go CHL but more have gone NCAA for a year now.

BTW Shattuck has fallen from greatness these days.

 

[Tatar Shots]

Why did you bump an 11 year old thread?

 

[57special]

Ranks would probably be something like this:

1. AHL
2. OHL
3. WHL
4. NCAA
5. QMJHL

NCAA teams will beat CHL teams 7 out of 10 times.

 

[57special]

Since the skill levels of players in these leagues often overlap, I think a "player skill range" would be a better way to compare all the leagues. I don't know that I'm the best person to determine the "player skill range", but I'll take a shot...

1. NHL (80-100)
2. AHL (70-90)
3. NCAA (50-85)
4. USNTDP (65-80)
4. CHL's (55-80)
5. USHL (50-75)
6. BCHL (45-75)
7. AAA Midget (45-70)
8. Other Canadian Junior A (40-65)
9. MSHSL (25-65)

...or something like that. Obviously, there'll always be players like Sidney Crosby and John Tavares that fall out of the range because they legally CAN'T play any higher. Crosby was probably a 80 when he played AAA Midget (Shattuck), a 90 when he played in the "Q", and is obviously now a solid 99.999999.

Know a guy who played at Mankato(MN D1...good, not great, hockey school). He had a good college career, and went on to play minor pro. He said the ECHL was a step up from the NCAA. When I asked him in what sense, he said, "In everything."

oops, just noticed the OP date.

 

[Bonin21]

Why did you bump an 11 year old thread?

Didn't even notice that

 

[bigdog16]

NCAA teams will beat CHL teams 7 out of 10 times.

Eh unless its a top 5 CHL team, its more like 9/10. Theres a noticable gap, and a reason we’ve seen players struggle in NCAA go to the CHL and light it up

 

[93LEAFS]

This is pretty easy.

AHL
NCAA
OHL
WHL
QMJHL

 

[Thebesthockey]

AHL
NCAA
OHL
QMJHL
WHL
USHL
JrA