Percentage of Canadian NHL players drops to 45%

[Uncle Rotter]

One of the most "Canadian" teams in the NHL (the Blues, with 14 Canadians) win the Stanley Cup. Well done.

16 of 23 players used during the playoffs. And Steen spent part of his childhood in Winnipeg. They were as Canadian as a beaver crashing a truck into a Tim Horton's.

 

[DannyGallivan]

And Steen spent part of his childhood in Winnipeg.

Born and raised.

 

[DannyGallivan]

16 of 23 players used during the playoffs. And Steen spent part of his childhood in Winnipeg. They were as Canadian as a beaver crashing a truck into a Tim Horton's.

How about one just using the drive-thru...

 

[Rarename91]

Good now I want more Irish and Icelandic players

 

[Anaheim4ever]

Doesn't it have alot to do with the increasing numbers of Americans being drafted ? as well as more teams drafting europeans from Sweden/Finland/Switzerland/Germany/Czech/Denmark/Slovak/Latvia
Growth of youth hockey in California is another reason why the number of Americans is increasing, Cam York was drafted 14th overall & Ryan Johnson 31st overall both went thru Jr Ducks, Anaheim Ducks have done their part to increase the growth of Hockey & Cam York is the result of that.
When you consider how hot it is outside in California & global warming, the appeal of Ice Hockey is strong and sports like Baseball are boring to todays kids (which is why Baseball has been trying to hard to speed up the game cause of the ADHD generation). Hockey is even starting to be played more among Latinos like Auston Matthews.

 

[Bixby Snyder]

42.75% at the start of this season. Damn, Canada will be under 40% by next season at this rate.

 

[Uncle Rotter]

2019-20 Rookies:
Canada 38.0%, USA 24.0%, Sweden 14.5%, Russia 8.5%, Finland 6.0%, Czech Republic 3.5%, Germany 1.0%

 

[plusandminus]

I haven't read every post here, but some of the first 40 or so posts seemed surprised about the decreasing percentage of Russian players.
It's mostly because of KHL. Players from Russia, their neighbors Finland, etc choose to play in KHL instead of the NHL. The very best players still chooses the NHL, but those of a more average or below average NHL skill might enjoy being well payed stars in the KHL more.
Not all of the best 600 or so players choose to play in the NHL. Before KHL, some chose to be stars in Switzerland, earning fairly big money, and have far less travel compared to flying across the USA and Canada playing 80-84 games per season.

 

[morehockeystats]

I haven't read every post here, but some of the first 40 or so posts seemed surprised about the decreasing percentage of Russian players.
It's mostly because of KHL. Players from Russia, their neighbors Finland, etc choose to play in KHL instead of the NHL. The very best players still chooses the NHL, but those of a more average or below average NHL skill might enjoy being well payed stars in the KHL more.
Not all of the best 600 or so players choose to play in the NHL. Before KHL, some chose to be stars in Switzerland, earning fairly big money, and have far less travel compared to flying across the USA and Canada playing 80-84 games per season.

The KHL travel is worse than the NHL travel. Only the players from Russia may _prefer_ playing in the KHL, mostly because of the lifestyle adaptation, the players for other countries participating in the KHL only go there after exhausting their NHL opportunities, including the Finns.

 

[Djp]

42.75% at the start of this season. Damn, Canada will be under 40% by next season at this rate.

I wonder how many USA players are dual citizenship players

 

[Newsworthy]

You must be very young.

The NHL players were not a factor on Olympic rosters pre-1998. Therefore, the Olympics were clearly NOT a best on best tournament before then.

The bottom line is that it is still amazing that Canada still has almost half of all NHL players, well over 100 years after the birth of the league, especially when you consider the vast populations of the U.S and Russia. Essentially, it takes the rest of the hockey playing world to barely edge Canada on its own when it comes to the make up of the NHL.

... and we are still the team to beat at every best on best tournament. Yeah, I think Canada is doing pretty well.

It's really impressive how the US has this many NHL and professional players worldwide when you consider hockey in America is a niche sport. Hockey is below football, baseball, basketball, and soccer in popularity. Golf, tennis, and race car driving get better ratings. For the most part the cold states produce the majority of talent.
Hockey has no impact on most urban cities and doesn't have much of any influence on the minority communities.
It's an expensive sport and many states don't even have ice rinks used for organized leagues. Most American kids don't even know how to ice skate.

 

[Bank Shot]

It's really impressive how the US has this many NHL and professional players worldwide when you consider hockey in America is a niche sport.

That's what happens when you have 300 million people.

 

[Newsworthy]

That's what happens when you have 300 million people.

You obviously ignored everything else I said. Canada should be great at hockey because its like second nature.

 

[FerrisRox]

Don Cherry noted the imminent rise of American hockey long before there's was reasonable evidence to assert the case. He's been proven right. The percentage of American hockey players is a testament to the great work done by USA Hockey.

Actually, no, he noted it when it was pretty damn obvious to assert the case.

When hockey started to be played at the grass roots level in regions of the US it had never been played before the pool of players in the country swelled dramatically and it didn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that it was going to eventually lead to more US-born NHL players too.

 

[ITM]

Actually, no, he noted it when it was pretty damn obvious to assert the case.

When hockey started to be played at the grass roots level in regions of the US it had never been played before the pool of players in the country swelled dramatically and it didn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that it was going to eventually lead to more US-born NHL players too.

It most certainly was not "pretty damn obvious" to assert the case the time. That's revisionist. We're talking decades ago. He noted the oncoming American hockey program with few examples to note outside of those American players developed by Hockey Canada. He wasn't referring to volume, he was referring to the quality of the programs and the apparent mechanics set in place by USA Hockey that elevated standards across the board.

An aerospace engineer...is likely to reason that quality doesn't necessarily follow from quantity. Especially if he's a Finnish aerospace engineer. But to the point, volume was not what Cherry was focused on.

You may not recall, as some may not, given the fashion of cancel culture and tarring and feathering any admirable memory of Don Cherry, but this as in many other instances, Cherry often defended American interests in light of his personal experience (i.e. in regards to his time in the AHL, his wife, rise to the NHL, etc...) against CANADIAN critics of the American hockey program, and the States in general. Something he often did, but was seldom celebrated for.

And it's noteworthy to point out, that it was likely an oft forgotten and uncelebrated element of his segments because Cherry was lightning quick to denounce any and all programs, people or potentially harmful inanimate objects that threatened or had damaged his view of Canadian pre-eminance in hockey.

 

[FerrisRox]

It most certainly was not "pretty damn obvious" to assert the case the time. That's revisionist.

It's not revisionist at all. Once the NHL expanded their footprint into the southern states and the best hockey league in the world now fully covered the United States it was pretty obvious that with more people exposed to the game, more people would be playing the game and the US would be able to turn out a much higher volume of high end hockey players. Don Cherry didn't have a crystal ball to come up with this conclusion. It was widely discussed back in the late 80's have the Wayne Gretzky trade and it was a very common topic of discussion once teams were in Dallas, San Jose, Florida and Anaheim.

We're talking decades ago. He noted the oncoming American hockey program with few examples to note outside of those American players developed by Hockey Canada. He wasn't referring to volume, he was referring to the quality of the programs and the apparent mechanics set in place by USA Hockey that elevated standards across the board.

If he wasn't referring to volume then (not surprisingly) he's a fool. Of course it's because of a volume. With increased players, comes increased coaches, better staffing and training at the University level and, of course, improvements across the board with the National team. Volume of players drives all of this and that should be obvious. With more and more people playing, the programs starting at the pee wee level all the way up to the NCAA got an influx of talent and the standards rose dramatically. You'd have to be an idiot not to have seen an increase of US born and trained talent in the NHL coming decades ago.

 

[ITM]

It's not revisionist at all. Once the NHL expanded their footprint into the southern states and the best hockey league in the world now fully covered the United States it was pretty obvious that with more people exposed to the game, more people would be playing the game and the US would be able to turn out a much higher volume of high end hockey players. Don Cherry didn't have a crystal ball to come up with this conclusion. It was widely discussed back in the late 80's have the Wayne Gretzky trade and it was a very common topic of discussion once teams were in Dallas, San Jose, Florida and Anaheim.

But it is revisionist because I watched the segment and I know the context I'm quoting is different from the one you recall.

The widely discussed element of Gretzky's move to LA was the intended effect of bringing awareness to non-traditional hockey markets i.e. California, Arizona, Florida and Texas. That was the business plan of the NHL. The secondary element of inspiring greater participation wasn't a foregone conclusion. It was aspirational. Still is. Built into various proposals was the built-in population of repatriated Canadians. This supported and mixed with (hopefully) a local population sold on the game's entry into the American big three of baseball, football and basketball. Want to take a step at where hockey ranks in the American sports market today?

But that's not what Cherry noted. His was a commentary on the quality of the American program which still populated the majority of it's teams from traditional American hockey areas.

IF it was - as you claim - easily anticipated, the percentage of non-traditional hockey market draftees would generate a (and I quote) "much higher volume of high end hockey players", then the occasional Auston Matthews. A selection considered novel. Players from Scottsdale and Ft.Lauderdale and Raleigh would have saturated USA Hockey according to your claim of Cherry's...And they haven't. They're still exceptions to the rule against traditional American hockey states populating USA Hockey.

So your memory buoyed by the hypothetical doesn't actually support one and the other any more than occasioning that Cherry was a fool for not referring to volume in an exchange where remembering the context of his assertion is of primary concern. You either remember what he referenced, or you don't, and your premise is invalid. And...your premise is invalid.

If he wasn't referring to volume then (not surprisingly) he's a fool. Of course it's because of a volume. With increased players, comes increased coaches, better staffing and training at the University level and, of course, improvements across the board with the National team. Volume of players drives all of this and that should be obvious. With more and more people playing, the programs starting at the pee wee level all the way up to the NCAA got an influx of talent and the standards rose dramatically. You'd have to be an idiot not to have seen an increase of US born and trained talent in the NHL coming decades ago.

If...then...Well...

If he's a fool, he'd fit right in with Finland's national hockey program. Because quality doesn't necessarily follow from quantity. And more's the point, we're talking about what he actually referred to as prompted by your post. Hypotheticals and assumptions after the fact don't mean a thing and aren't supported by present day outcomes from the expansion south according to your analysis.

Don Cherry wasn't an idiot when he - against the common opinion - championed USA Hockey. And in a conversation of reasonable hypotheticals, why would Cherry champion quantity opposite quality when all Cherry is concerned about is superiority? And that's precisely what impressed him. Not the amount of American players in non-traditional markets, but the fact that the OHL and the Q weren't going to be the only training grounds for American players. And that the USA Hockey operation was going to give the established hockey powers a run for their money in every tournament and every league of note in the hockey world.

 

[Claypool]

The CHL is no longer the preeminent league for future NHL players. Hockey Canada needs to create a similar system to the USNTDP, and I believe they will eventually as the numbers continue to decline.

 

[lottster14]

Less parents have putting their kids into hockey on their mind in Canada imo. The minor leagues are failing and there has been too much news about injuries coming out (compared to decades ago) and the cost is too much.

 

[Jets4Life]

As of the 2017-18 season, the composition of the NHL is as follows:

Canada 45.3%
United States 27.3%
Sweden 9.9%
Finland 4.3%
Russia 4.0%
Czech Republic 3.8%
Switzerland 1.5%
Slovakia 1.3%
Germany 0.7%
Denmark 0.7%
Other 1.2%

NHL Totals by Nationality ‑ 2017-2018 Stats

Here is an update for 2022-23:

Canada 42.1% (-3.2%)
United States 28.1% (+0.8%)
Sweden 10.1% (+0.2%)
Russia 5.9% (+1.9%)
Finland 5.2% (+0.9%)
Czech Republic 3.9% (+0.1%)
Switzerland 1.1% (-0.4%)
Slovakia 0.9% (-0.4%)
Germany 0.8% (+0.1%)
Denmark 0.6% (-0.1%)
Other 1.4% (+0.2%)

source: Active NHL Players Totals by Nationality ‑ 2022‑2023 Stats

 

[WarriorofTime]

Here is an update for 2022-23:

Canada 42.4% (-2.9%)
United States 27.7% (+0.4%)
Sweden 10.3% (+0.4%)
Finland 5.1% (+0.8%)
Russia 5.9% (+1.9%)
Czech Republic 3.8% (no change)
Switzerland 1.2% (-0.3%)
Slovakia 0.9% (-0.4%)
Germany 0.8% (+0.1%)
Denmark 0.6% (-0.1%)
Other 1.5% (+0.3)

source: Active NHL Players Totals by Nationality ‑ 2022‑2023 Stats

AHL has also dipped below 45 % Canadian.

 

[Jets4Life]

Quite the decline in Canadian-born NHL players. At this rate, the USA can conceivably pass Canada sometime in the mid 2030s.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Quite the decline in Canadian-born NHL players. At this rate, the USA can conceivably pass Canada sometime in the mid 2030s.

I don't think so, the numbers are stabilizing and the Draft numbers are pretty reflective of that.

2022 was 39.6 % Canadian, 21.3 % American
2021 was 39.9 % Canadian, 20.2 % American
2020 was 33.8 % Canadian, 23.1 % American.
2019 was 32.3 % Canadian, 25.8 % American
2018 was 33.6 % Canadian, 24.0 % American

Interesting to see the Canadian numbers get up to around 40 % when they were at 33 % a few years ago. Who knows if that's a trend reversal or noise. Either way, I think the U.S. numbers are at or very close to the high watermark. The downstream effects of the Sunbelt Expansion and explosion of minor hockey in "non-traditional" areas accordingly has had that wave of players grow up and hit their prime ages (you can generally count on the average NHL age to remain around 27). So those sorts of numbers are pretty likely to continue in my opinion.

To see ANOTHER explosion, you'd likely need to see the growth of high-level minor hockey in areas that are not serviced by an NHL franchise (like how Crosby can come from Nova Scotia, the Staal brothers can come from Thunder Bay, that sort of thing), which basically would mean those located well outside of major metro areas. Like how Football players in the U.S. can come from basically anywhere because everywhere has High School Football. But that seems incredibly unlikely due to the massive infrastructure and costs that go into creating such a thing and close to non-existent demand.

 

[Mattb124]

Bottom line, Canada is still dominating every other individual nation as far as stocking NHL talent. After over 100 years, Canada is STILL number one, despite having a fraction of the population of the USA and Russia.

Hey, if one country supplies all (or almost all) of the talent, you can never call that sport truly "international".

“All” or “almost all” must have a very different meaning in Canada than in the U.S. We would describe 45% as being less than half.

 

[Staniowski]

These numbers are good news. Great to see countries like Germany doing well, and it would be nice to see Russia, Czechia, and Slovakia increase significantly in the coming years.

Sweden and Finland are very healthy, and the States continue to produce lots of quality players.