Ncaa/chl ?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Zine

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
11,958
1,774
Rostov-on-Don
VOB said:
Zine, I had a big debate on the age issue with Goph not that long ago, I am sure you can still find it in the NCAA section...

You are giving age too much credit. Look at the Petes..average age 18.8, compare them to the Gophs..average age 21...just a shade over two years difference. It is not like there is a four or five year gap. Furthermore look at the height and weight of each team. The Gophs measure 6.0 ft and 181lbs....the Petes top out at 6.1 and 196lbs.

:eek: :eek:
For the average prospect, 2 years of development is HUGE...absolutely HUGE. It's insane to think otherwise.
Plus, how do you think other NCAA teams can compete with the Minnesotas, North Dakotas, Michigans, Boston Colleges, etc. (who have most of the top prospects).....that's right, they're generally OLDER - by around 1-2 years.

VOB said:
I have seen the Petes play and not only are they big, fast and talented...they are strong and physical. They would have trouble in the NCAA not because they are "younger" but because of the way the game is called in the U.S. college ranks. I have not seen Minny play this year yet but I have seen Wisconsin, Michigan and Miami (all top ranked teams) and I can tell you flat out that if the Petes were to play them using NHL referees....they would beat Michigan and Miami and give Wisconsin all they could handle.

No way.

Like I was alluding to earlier......talent wise, compare the Petes to North Dakota; it's not even close.
Apart from Staal and Downie, who else on that team is a legitimate upper tier NHL prospect?
UND has the likes of Stafford, Toews, Oshie, Lee, Zajac, Chorney, Finley. Despite all this talent, UND is struggling because they are so young. You think a much younger Petes team with much less 'top tier' NHL prospects would be doing better?
Earlier this year, Wisconsin easily beat North Dakota because the Sioux were just to young and inexperienced to keep up with UW. You're telling me that Peterborough would give the Badgers all they could handle when UND couldn't even do it? It doesn't matter if the game is called by NHL or college rules..I just don't see it happening.
 

Letang fan 58

No More Fleury
May 12, 2004
5,814
1
Canada
Jon Prescription said:
I'd love to see the Memorial Cup champ take on the national champion of the NCAA and have the NCAA destroy them year after year just to simply end this argument.


LOL @ this post, hillarious from a long time poster, what basis you going on?

There is no way you will get a true answer which league is better, however i personally think the CHL team would kick the crap out of the NCAA team, maybe it has something to do with playing a full schedule instead of 40 games and then having to play real playoffs where they are best of 7 or something crazy like that.

There is NO chance that the NCAA winner last year would have skated with London........it would have been a joke blowout game by 5 goals plus.
 

Letang fan 58

No More Fleury
May 12, 2004
5,814
1
Canada
MN_Gopher said:
Age makes a big factor. And guys like Vanek, Eaves, Parise, Bochenski, Paul Martin, Ballard do leave early, but thet still leave as 20 year old sophmores and juniors. Those guys at 20 are much better than most anybody in the CHL at 18. A top NCAA team would kill most any CHL team. Age and talent they are better. Next years gopher team has the possibilty of featuring.

Kris Chucko 1st rd Junior
Balke Wheeler 1st round Sophmore
Nate Hagemo 2nd round Sophmore if he gets redshirt
Ryan Stoa 2nd round Sophmore
Jeff Frazee 2nd round Sophmore
Alex Goligoski 2nd round Junior
Danny Irmen 3rd round Senior
Ryan Potulny 3rd round Senior
Mike Vannelli 4th round Senior
RJ Anderson 4th round Sophmore
Derek Peltier 6th round Junior

With more than likey
Kessel 1st round Sophmore
E. Johnson 1st round Freshman
Okposo 1st round Freshman
Flynn 1st-2nd round Freshman
Fischer 1st-2nd Freshman
Carmen 2nd-3rd Freshman

And
Jim O'Brien a top player for the 07 draft.

Not to shabby at all. And not all of these guys are 18 either. You are going to tell me on paper that CHL teams can field a better team than that.


Age only factors in so much, Canadian Junior team was one of the youngest in the tourney and they won gold, how do you figure that happened with the age gap?
 

MN_Gopher

Registered User
May 2, 2002
3,628
21
Mpls
Visit site
phaneuf_fan_3 said:
LOL @ this post, hillarious from a long time poster, what basis you going on?

There is no way you will get a true answer which league is better, however i personally think the CHL team would kick the crap out of the NCAA team, maybe it has something to do with playing a full schedule instead of 40 games and then having to play real playoffs where they are best of 7 or something crazy like that.

There is NO chance that the NCAA winner last year would have skated with London........it would have been a joke blowout game by 5 goals plus.


Look at the WJC. Is team Canada, mosty CHL guys, in most years simular to what a CHL all star team would look like? The American WJC championship team, of mostly NCAA guys, is no where near what the 1st, 2nd or 3rd team all NCAA team looks like. From this years team probally only Kessel and J. Johnson would be on an NCAA all star team. And they might not make it. Kessel is the third best forward on the gophers.
 

VOB

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,692
0
Michigan
Visit site
Zine, How much CHL hockey do you watch? I'm telling you, based on what I saw from Wisconsin, the Petes could easily play with them. Based on what I saw from Michigan...the Petes could not only play with them, they would just flat out beat them....Michigan is very talented, in terms of puck skills and speed but they are small and fragile..the Petes would simply paste them into the boards until you had a hard time distinguishing the Wolverines from part of the board advertisments!

You mention Wisconsin handling NoDak...well the truth of the matter is the age difference between the two is negligible and NoDak has more of the "upper tier" NHL prospects so NoDak's tough times against teams like the Badgers has nothing at all to do with age.

This is my opinion from personal observations based on many many games over a long period of time....the simple fact is that the CHL is, on average, much more physical than the NCAA and its players are on average, larger and stronger.

Just look at the NTDP....they are a bunch of 17 year old kids who lost to schools like Wisonsin and Michigan by one goal....and this year's team is not considered exceptional by any means (unlike last year's team).
 
Last edited:

VOB

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,692
0
Michigan
Visit site
MN_Gopher said:
Look at the WJC. Is team Canada, mosty CHL guys, in most years simular to what a CHL all star team would look like? The American WJC championship team, of mostly NCAA guys, is no where near what the 1st, 2nd or 3rd team all NCAA team looks like. From this years team probally only Kessel and J. Johnson would be on an NCAA all star team. And they might not make it. Kessel is the third best forward on the gophers.


The CHL is not only represented in the WJC by Canada but by many other teams. Put them all together...guys like Schremp from the U.S. and Radulov from Russia..and I would be quite confident that a CHL all star team could run with a NCAA all star team.
 

MN_Gopher

Registered User
May 2, 2002
3,628
21
Mpls
Visit site
phaneuf_fan_3 said:
Age only factors in so much, Canadian Junior team was one of the youngest in the tourney and they won gold, how do you figure that happened with the age gap?


For one that gopher team is coached by tDon Lucia. That makes a huge difference. Second that team has played together all year. Not just got together for a tourney. The Canadians had home ice and a better coach. That also makes a big difference.
 

MN_Gopher

Registered User
May 2, 2002
3,628
21
Mpls
Visit site
VOB said:
Zine, How much CHL hockey do you watch? I'm telling you, based on what I saw from Wisconsin, the Petes could easily play with them. Based on what I saw from Michigan...the Petes could not only play with them, they would just flat out beat them....Michigan is very talented, in terms of puck skills and speed but they are small and fragile..the Petes would simply paste them into the boards until you had a hard time distinguishing the Wolverines from part of the board advertisments!

This is my opinion from personal observations based on many many games over a long period of time....the simple fact is that the CHL is, on average, much more physical than the NCAA and its players are on average, larger and stronger.

Just look at the NTDP....they are a bunch of 17 year old kids who lost to schools like Wisonsin and Michigan by one goal....and this year's team is not considered exceptional by any means (unlike last year's team).

I watch a lot of Wild games and i watch alot of Gopher games. In the Wilds first year they looked not so hot at all. Watching Leopold, Paul Martin, Ballard and others who were very good college players, Taffe, Pohl and many more. Now having watched Benasyk, Roest, Gavey. Now what team looked a lot better? Was smoother? Made better plays? Looked crisper? Now tell me what team would win. The team that looked better or the team was better. I love the gophers but they would have lost no problem to that Wild team.
 

MN_Gopher

Registered User
May 2, 2002
3,628
21
Mpls
Visit site
Every NCAA teams has a Ballard or Matt Greene and even Jack Johnson this year. Physical guys just waiting to be able to play the way they want to. Think Bertuzzi thought Ballard was wimp when he got hip checked. Or what about when Ballard put Boogaard airborne. I am sure you saw Ballrd catch Park in the wide open. Yeah i would loved to see Ballard as a junior playing in a more physical game light up some cocky 17-19 year old. That would not have been pretty. Same thing with Greene, Stuart and even guys like Jones and Demarchi seem to thrive in physical games. Not all make it the AHL or NHL but there are very physical guys out there.
 

VOB

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,692
0
Michigan
Visit site
Watch more games Goph because if you can't tell the difference between the NHL and the NCAA....

Do you understand the nuances of the game? Its not a matter of looking crisper, making plays and looking "good" but how they made those plays...could they have been made in other circumstances....could they have used the ice as effectivley if the opposing team was playing another way. Sure Taffe looked good against college boys but he looks a heck of alot different against AHL/NHL players doesn't he?

The CHL and the NCAA games are different, plain and simple and just about anyone will tell you that. Take a team like Michigan and have them play in Peterborough against the Petes and I am telling you the way Michigan is playing now it would not be pretty for them. Take the Petes into Ann Arbor and it will be a totally different game....Michigan will have at least 10-13 PP compared to the Petes 4or5 and the momentum will greatly favor Michigan...just because the way the call the game.
 
Last edited:

VOB

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,692
0
Michigan
Visit site
MN_Gopher said:
Every NCAA teams has a Ballard or Matt Greene and even Jack Johnson this year. Physical guys just waiting to be able to play the way they want to. Think Bertuzzi thought Ballard was wimp when he got hip checked. Or what about when Ballard put Boogaard airborne. I am sure you saw Ballrd catch Park in the wide open. Yeah i would loved to see Ballard as a junior playing in a more physical game light up some cocky 17-19 year old. That would not have been pretty. Same thing with Greene, Stuart and even guys like Jones and Demarchi seem to thrive in physical games. Not all make it the AHL or NHL but there are very physical guys out there.


That is why I say that on average, the CHL players are bigger and more physical but there are exceptions. Believe me Goph, no CHL team would be afraid to take on a NCAA one, especially when it comes to physical play! Just remember what Thelen said (one of your own native sons) about the WHL and the NCAA.
 

J17 Vs Proclamation

Registered User
Oct 29, 2004
8,025
2
Reading.
CHL has a draft, and therefore has much more parity. If you took most of the better players from the CHL and put them onto one team like the Gophers have, the CHL would win IMO.
 

MN_Gopher

Registered User
May 2, 2002
3,628
21
Mpls
Visit site
VOB said:
Watch more games Goph because if you can't tell the difference between the NHL and the NCAA....

Do you understand the nuances of the game? Its not a matter of looking crisper, making plays and looking "good" but how they made those plays...could they have been made in other circumstances....could they have used the ice as effectivley if the opposing team was playing another way. Sure Taffe looked good against college boys but he looks a heck of alot different against AHL/NHL players doesn't he?

The CHL and the NCAA games are different, plain and simple and just about anyone will tell you that. Take a team like Michigan and have them play in Peterborough against the Petes and I am telling you the way Michigan is playing now it would not be pretty for them. Take the Petes into Ann Arbor and it will be a totally different game....Michigan will have at least 10-13 PP compared to the Petes 4or5 and the momentum will greatly favor Michigan...just because the way the call the game.

What exactly do you see in MI and what do you see in the Petes then? All you have said is that by watching both i can tell because. What are you seeing?

And once again you say how on average or how many NCAA teams and that there are exeptions. Ballard, DeMarchi, Leopold and Paul Martin all played on the same team. Three of those guys are having success in the NHL. And are not being pushed around at all. DeMarchi is a tough guy, that should crack the NHL someday. With another D man on that team a 6 foot and 200 + pounds senior named Nick Angel. Not the greatest by any means. But at 22 not to shabby. Matt Greene, Jones, Smaby, the Hales. Thats another very tough D set. Petiot, Pressing and Stuart another very tough D set. The top teams in the NCAA all have well balanced defensive corps and yes they have size as well. Danny Irmen broke his hand from punching a guy in the face. I am sure he will run at the first sign of contact. Look at Gionta and St Louis. Too of the toughest little guys. Where did they come from? One the meanest players of all Chelios came form the NCAA. I could go on. Dont judge players in the NCAA by the game. They would not tuck tail and run. Instead i think that would revel at the oppurtunity to let it out and stomp some teen-agers.

In the CHL is so tough. Explain, Parrish, Comrie, Foy and the like. Their numbers all blew up in the CHL.
 

Zine

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
11,958
1,774
Rostov-on-Don
VOB said:
You mention Wisconsin handling NoDak...well the truth of the matter is the age difference between the two is negligible and NoDak has more of the "upper tier" NHL prospects so NoDak's tough times against teams like the Badgers has nothing at all to do with age.

Yes, it has everything to do with age. 1/2 of UND's team is Freshman. 4/6 of the defencemen are 'true' freshmen. No matter how good they are - they have a hard time competing with college level players born in 82-84 (Wisconsin has many).
Saying this, UND is still older than CHL teams.


VOB said:
This is my opinion from personal observations based on many many games over a long period of time....the simple fact is that the CHL is, on average, much more physical than the NCAA and its players are on average, larger and stronger.).

What does being bigger, stronger and more physical have to do with anything? Just 'cause your more physical doesn't mean your better - even at an NHL level. Just because someone is bigger and stronger does not mean they're more developed either. Fact is, most bigger 16-19 year olds are still pretty 'green'. You can't compare that to smaller 21-23 year olds who've grown into their bodies and have more experience - this is prevelant at an NHL level too. Heck, the younger the league, the easier it is for smaller players to overcome the size disadvantage.
Matt Smaby is a good example. The guy is big and hits like a truck, but at 19 was frequently overmatched at the college level against older players. Look at him now at 21; its like night and day. Same thing is happening to Joe Finley right now, and he's 6-7 240.

VOB said:
Just look at the NTDP....they are a bunch of 17 year old kids who lost to schools like Wisonsin and Michigan by one goal....and this year's team is not considered exceptional by any means (unlike last year's team).

Like NCAA teams even try in these games. These exhibitions are often used to give their benchwarmers game experience.
A better way to measure this is to see how these U-18 players perform in their first year of college. Very few even end up being 1st liners their Fr. year.
 
Last edited:

Zine

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
11,958
1,774
Rostov-on-Don
VOB said:
Watch more games Goph because if you can't tell the difference between the NHL and the NCAA....

Do you understand the nuances of the game? Its not a matter of looking crisper, making plays and looking "good" but how they made those plays...could they have been made in other circumstances....could they have used the ice as effectivley if the opposing team was playing another way. Sure Taffe looked good against college boys but he looks a heck of alot different against AHL/NHL players doesn't he?

The CHL and the NCAA games are different, plain and simple and just about anyone will tell you that. Take a team like Michigan and have them play in Peterborough against the Petes and I am telling you the way Michigan is playing now it would not be pretty for them. Take the Petes into Ann Arbor and it will be a totally different game....Michigan will have at least 10-13 PP compared to the Petes 4or5 and the momentum will greatly favor Michigan...just because the way the call the game.

You make it sound like (because of the way the CHL game is played) college teams would have a tough time physically in the CHL.
If that were the case, there'd be no way of explaining why there are so many smaller, weaker, less physical players also excelling in the CHL. The CHL is full of these types of players; many leading their teams in scoring. If the difference really was like night and day, wouldn't the smaller, weaker CHL players not be able to compete?
There's a difference between not being able to play a certain style and adjustment. It would take a while for NCAA teams to adjust to the way the CHL game is called - but once they do (I'll say it again) the differences in age would then take over.
 

VOB

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,692
0
Michigan
Visit site
Yes, it has everything to do with age. 1/2 of UND's team is Freshman. 4/6 of the defencemen are 'true' freshmen. No matter how good they are - they have a hard time competing with college level players born in 82-84 (Wisconsin has many).
Saying this, UND is still older than CHL teams.

Wisconsin's average age is 21.2. North Dokata's average age is 21. A difference of about 2.5 months - yeah real big difference. I think North Dakota's problem has to do more with the way they have been playing (underperforming) than it has anything to do with age.


What does being bigger, stronger and more physical have to do with anything? Just 'cause your more physical doesn't mean your better - even at an NHL level.

Bigger, stronger nullifies the age advantage. A CHL team would not be run off the ice because the college players are older...they would be able to handle their own in every physical sense...the game would come down to who actually was better....age would have little to do with it.

Like NCAA teams even try in these games. These exhibitions are often used to give their benchwarmers game experience.
A better way to measure this is to see how these U-18 players perform in their first year of college. Very few even end up being 1st liners their Fr. year.

You are partially correct. College teams do have a hard time getting up for these games but its not like the D-1 teams sit their top players and entire upper class. According to those who argue that the NCAA is better than the CHL simply because of the age factor, the NTDP then should not even be in the game at all, no matter how hard the D-1 team is trying....their freshman and sophmores (who are two years older than the NTDP players) alone should be able to put a whipping on these very young kids. The fact that they don't says something.
 

Zine

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
11,958
1,774
Rostov-on-Don
VOB said:
Wisconsin's average age is 21.2. North Dokata's average age is 21. A difference of about 2.5 months - yeah real big difference. I think North Dakota's problem has to do more with the way they have been playing (underperforming) than it has anything to do with age.

Nope. Their young defense was taken to school - gave up 70 shots in 2 games.

4 of the 6 starters are 87's.
 

VOB

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,692
0
Michigan
Visit site
MN_Gopher said:
What exactly do you see in MI and what do you see in the Petes then? All you have said is that by watching both i can tell because. What are you seeing? .

Watch how Michigan plays down low (they don't), watch how they handle traffic in the slot, and how they play along the boards (and many other college teams play the same style). Watch what happens to them when a team "slows" the game down, pushes the puck to the half boards and takes away the skating lanes, tripping up the transition game. It use blow my mind why on earth teams such as Western Michigan would attempt to play Michigan's quick transition game...until I realized that they had no choice but to play that style.

The NCAA wasn't always the soft league that it is today. Back in the mid to late 80's, many teams played a "pro style" game. I remember listening to both Frank Anzalone and Jeff Jackson saying that they never had the most talented teams but they won because of how they played the game. Work ethic of course was paramount but they would tell anyone who listened that the Lakers played in the same vein as your typical Major A team...agressive and always attacking the puck and simply bumping the smaller faster teams off their game.

I remember having a conversation with Anzalone when he came back to coaching Lake State. The college game had changed he said. They had taken the "big man" out of it, allowing the smaller faster skating teams to have their way in the NCAA. Now LSSU has always had a "big" team but what Frank meant was that they could no longer play big. They could no longer model themselves off a pro style game because the officiating simply would not allow it.

Honestly Goph and Zine, how much of the CHL do you watch? Few and I mean very very few of those who watch both would say that the NCAA is the tougher league to play in.

Yes small guys do play in the CHL but they had better be able to handle traffic and the hitting. Many do rack up the points, initially but injuries and fatigue have a way of catching up with those smaller players...unless of course they can handle it.

You mention Comrie's numbers shooting up....well remember he was also one of the leading scorers in the NCAA as a sophmore and would have dominated the NCAA in much the same manner had he stuck around for his Junior year. I have a taped interview with him stating that he was not ready for the CHL at the age of 16 and that is why he went the NCAA route.

You mention Foy, well what you expect from a NHL bound player....his production at Merrimack was decent but you have to wonder how he was used...I mean Aquino, a player barely a year older than him was their leading scorer and where is he today? But then again Foy was a fiesty player, a style that does not lend itself that well to the NCAA.
 

VOB

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,692
0
Michigan
Visit site
Zine said:
Nope. Their young defense was taken to school - gave up 70 shots in 2 games.

4 of the 6 starters are 87's.

NoDak lists 10 D on their roster, why would they start 4 1987 born players...wouldn't have anything to with them being better than the older D.
 

Lanny MacDonald*

Guest
Another train wreck. CHL versus NCAA? Its no contest. The NCAA doesn't compete.

The best players in their age group, 19 and under, will play in the CHL. Its the best league and its the best road to the NHL. That makes it the best, no matter which way you wish to spin it. Its the defacto standard for development hockey leagues.

The cold harsh truth is that the NCAA is for players who were never good enough to play in the CHL. The NCAA recruits from the junior leagues where players not good enough to play elite junior reside. The NCAA is filled with players that came from leagues that are inferior to the CHL. All the development time in the world does not make the NCAA superior to the CHL. In fact, it suports the claim of the CHL's superiority. Nothing has changed for how players get to the NHL.
 

VOB

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,692
0
Michigan
Visit site
The Iconoclast said:
Another train wreck. CHL versus NCAA? Its no contest. The NCAA doesn't compete.

The best players in their age group, 19 and under, will play in the CHL. Its the best league and its the best road to the NHL. That makes it the best, no matter which way you wish to spin it. Its the defacto standard for development hockey leagues.

The cold harsh truth is that the NCAA is for players who were never good enough to play in the CHL. The NCAA recruits from the junior leagues where players not good enough to play elite junior reside. The NCAA is filled with players that came from leagues that are inferior to the CHL. All the development time in the world does not make the NCAA superior to the CHL. In fact, it suports the claim of the CHL's superiority. Nothing has changed for how players get to the NHL.

Thats a rather harsh statement. There are many players in the NCAA who have the talent and ability to have played in the CHL if they had chosen to. The difference is that the majority of the better 16-19 year olds do indeed choose the CHL...but that doesn't mean there isn't alot of good talent in the NCAA.
 

Zine

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
11,958
1,774
Rostov-on-Don
VOB said:
NoDak lists 10 D on their roster, why would they start 4 1987 born players...wouldn't have anything to with them being better than the older D.

Don't be rediculous....you know what I mean. I'm not talking about walk-ons, career college players, etc. I'm 24, does this mean I'm better than every player in the world younger than I am? :shakehead
I'm talking about quality players with a legitimate chance of playing some sort of professional hockey. If you're in this category (in relation to eachother) a 2 year difference in age is huge.
 

Lanny MacDonald*

Guest
VOB said:
Thats a rather harsh statement. There are many players in the NCAA who have the talent and ability to have played in the CHL if they had chosen to. The difference is that the majority of the better 16-19 year olds do indeed choose the CHL...but that doesn't mean there isn't alot of good talent in the NCAA.

Yup, its a harsh statement. But its true. The CHL is the path the NHL prefers to get its players from. No harm in saying that, as its true. Yes, the NCAA has plenty of talented players, but talent and $2.50 will get you a coffee at any Starbucks. The CHL is just a better league featuring better players.
 

VOB

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,692
0
Michigan
Visit site
Zine said:
Don't be rediculous....you know what I mean. I'm not talking about walk-ons, career college players, etc. I'm 24, does this mean I'm better than every player in the world younger than I am? :shakehead
I'm talking about quality players with a legitimate chance of playing some sort of professional hockey. If you're in this category (in relation to eachother) a 2 year difference in age is huge.

Then what exactly are you saying? I though age was the be all and end all. Why is the NCAA the better league? According to you because of the age factor. Now you are saying something different.

Tell me Zine, as a whole who has the better talent...the CHL or the NCAA. I am not talking about individual teams because yes both NoDak and Minny feature a nice collection of talent but who do they play against? How much pro talent does Tech or even St Cloud have?

While I disagree somewhat with iconclast, he is right in his claim that the CHL is the superior league based on talent. In the latest CSB mid term rankings, 22 out of 30 players are from the CHL. The OHL alone has more ranked players in the 1st round than the entire NCAA or college bound players.

You underestimate the quality of play in the CHL.
 

Zine

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
11,958
1,774
Rostov-on-Don
VOB said:
Bigger, stronger nullifies the age advantage. A CHL team would not be run off the ice because the college players are older...they would be able to handle their own in every physical sense...the game would come down to who actually was better....age would have little to do with it.

I disagree. From what I wrote before.
Just because someone is bigger and stronger does not mean they're more developed either. Fact is, most bigger 16-19 year olds are still pretty 'green'. You can't compare that to smaller 21-23 year olds who've grown into their bodies and have more experience - this is prevelant at an NHL level too. Heck, the younger the league, the easier it is for smaller players to overcome the size disadvantage.
Matt Smaby is a good example. The guy is big and hits like a truck, but at 19 was frequently overmatched at the college level against older players. Look at him now at 21; its like night and day. Same thing is happening to Joe Finley right now, and he's 6-7 240.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->