What would happen if there is no OHL season?

[AttackSound]

I like the idea of being able to trade first round picks. But the picks only, not the players picked in the first round (other than the trade window).

In theory the idea is good although the flaw is if the league allowed the trading of first round picks (only picks) the league would have to put a lot of limitations on it.

You would have teams with multiple picks in the first round and teams with none so it would give an unfair advantage for teams that are known for wheeling and dealing. I've had this debate many times over the years with many followers of the league and determined one thing the league managers would never agree on that as the result would be catastrophic to teams progression. You would have teams like the Knights swapping picks with teams that pick higher every year instead of them picking around the 20th pick they would be picking with the 2nd and 3rd and in some cases 1st overall picks with teams that can't attract those elite players to play for them.

Could you imagine years ago the Erie Otters trading the 1st overall pick used to select McDavid to the Knights for a boat load of conditional picks?? Or Quinton Byfield to a team the Ottawa 67's for picks.

This idea would stack top teams and weaken others. The QMJHL has allowed for years to trade 1st round selections and top teams like the Sea Dogs always get those higher selections and others who are just as talented don't.

I don't know if the OHL could adapt something like that without seeing a lot of unfair stacking of teams.

 

[Otto]

In theory the idea is good although the flaw is if the league allowed the trading of first round picks (only picks) the league would have to put a lot of limitations on it.

You would have teams with multiple picks in the first round and teams with none so it would give an unfair advantage for teams that are known for wheeling and dealing. I've had this debate many times over the years with many followers of the league and determined one thing the league managers would never agree on that as the result would be catastrophic to teams progression. You would have teams like the Knights swapping picks with teams that pick higher every year instead of them picking around the 20th pick they would be picking with the 2nd and 3rd and in some cases 1st overall picks with teams that can't attract those elite players to play for them.

Could you imagine years ago the Erie Otters trading the 1st overall pick used to select McDavid to the Knights for a boat load of conditional picks?? Or Quinton Byfield to a team the Ottawa 67's for picks.

This idea would stack top teams and weaken others. The QMJHL has allowed for years to trade 1st round selections and top teams like the Sea Dogs always get those higher selections and others who are just as talented don't.

I don't know if the OHL could adapt something like that without seeing a lot of unfair stacking of teams.

St. John has missed the playoffs in 3 of the last 6 seasons including the last two. They were also knocked out in the first round in one of those seasons

 

[SeniorJuniorFan]

Saint John

 

[Otto]

Saint John

Corrected.. point still stands.. they have missed the playoffs 3 of the last 6 seasons including the last two... hardly a "top team"

 

[BigBuck]

If there are no games this year what happens to the kids school packages? Would they get credit and a year of school paid for this year if there are no games?

 

[OMG67]

This compares to Tomasino trade, imo.
Blockbuster trade in the QMJHL involving Canadian world junior champion | TradeRumours.com

That is assuming you believe there isn't a second part of the Tomasino trade coming.

That said, that deal is massive. Three 1sts is silly. Then factor that into the equation of potentially no playoffs for both seasons you have Mercer? Wow.

 

[OMG67]

If there are no games this year what happens to the kids school packages? Would they get credit and a year of school paid for this year if there are no games?

Players get one semester of school for playing a game before Christmas. They get a second semester paid for when they play a game after New Years. So, players have already lost a semester for no games played in first half. If they don't play in the second half, they don't get the scholarship at all this year.

 

[OMG67]

In theory the idea is good although the flaw is if the league allowed the trading of first round picks (only picks) the league would have to put a lot of limitations on it.

You would have teams with multiple picks in the first round and teams with none so it would give an unfair advantage for teams that are known for wheeling and dealing. I've had this debate many times over the years with many followers of the league and determined one thing the league managers would never agree on that as the result would be catastrophic to teams progression. You would have teams like the Knights swapping picks with teams that pick higher every year instead of them picking around the 20th pick they would be picking with the 2nd and 3rd and in some cases 1st overall picks with teams that can't attract those elite players to play for them.

Could you imagine years ago the Erie Otters trading the 1st overall pick used to select McDavid to the Knights for a boat load of conditional picks?? Or Quinton Byfield to a team the Ottawa 67's for picks.

This idea would stack top teams and weaken others. The QMJHL has allowed for years to trade 1st round selections and top teams like the Sea Dogs always get those higher selections and others who are just as talented don't.

I don't know if the OHL could adapt something like that without seeing a lot of unfair stacking of teams.

I think if they added one simple restriction... you can only trade one 1st every two years, it would be ok.

The advantage would be a team like North Bay could trade the 1st overall pick for the 6th overall pick, get the comp plus the player they may have picked anyway because of reporting issues. It isn't all bad.

Just looking at that Mercer deal in the QMJHL though is silly. Three 1sts all in consecutive seasons? So bad. That just doesn't seem to work IMO.

If you are a team that needs to trade more than one 1st, I question your need for the player you are acquiring.

 

[dirty12]

That is assuming you believe there isn't a second part of the Tomasino trade coming.

That said, that deal is massive. Three 1sts is silly. Then factor that into the equation of potentially no playoffs for both seasons you have Mercer? Wow.

Part III? A few predicted the Tomasino trade (not the cost) after 2019 deadline as part II of the Moore plus picks for Studnicka & (Paquette?) deal.
That Mercier trade does seem silly. It can’t be easy to re-coup 3-1sts, 2-2nds, 4th over three years without having some real bad teams.

 

[OMG67]

Part III? A few predicted the Tomasino trade (not the cost) after 2019 deadline as part II of the Moore plus picks for Studnicka & (Paquette?) deal.
That Mercier trade does seem silly. It can’t be easy to re-coup 3-1sts, 2-2nds, 4th over three years without having some real bad teams.

Only thing I could see is if they planned on trading him this season.

 

[dirty12]

Perhaps it was more important to tank last season as Niagara forfeited their 1st this season and/or maybe didn’t want to risk injury to Tomasino.
It’s actually quite incredible how well trading ‘01s/selling in general worked out for Barrie & Niagara

 

[deleteme2468]

Not to sound hyperbolic but I think the CHL is in big trouble. Pre pandemic the league was not getting the talent it used to. Many teams struggling financially.

The USHL was a good league before all this and now they are getting an influx of players from Canada for obvious reasons. Plus you maintain your NCAA eligibility playing in that league. I fear it’s only a matter of time before more or most Canadian players go south for development, pandemic or no pandemic.

 

[RayzorIsDull]

Not to sound hyperbolic but I think the CHL is in big trouble. Pre pandemic the league was not getting the talent it used to. Many teams struggling financially.

The USHL was a good league before all this and now they are getting an influx of players from Canada for obvious reasons. Plus you maintain your NCAA eligibility playing in that league. I fear it’s only a matter of time before more or most Canadian players go south for development, pandemic or no pandemic.

You can't really disagree the last 2 NHL drafts the OHL has produced 10 NHL 1st round picks (since this is an OHL board). Obviously 2021 is up for grabs, who knows if there is a season but the highest OHL pick would probably Clarke?? After that we are talking McTavish/Chayka?? Probably not the greatest look for the league. Might be time to rebrand and evolve. Most likely the #1 pick or #2 pick will be from Ontario but he won't play a minute in the OHL.

 

[dirty12]

Not to sound hyperbolic but I think the CHL is in big trouble. Pre pandemic the league was not getting the talent it used to. Many teams struggling financially.

The USHL was a good league before all this and now they are getting an influx of players from Canada for obvious reasons. Plus you maintain your NCAA eligibility playing in that league. I fear it’s only a matter of time before more or most Canadian players go south for development, pandemic or no pandemic.

Alleviate the biggest USHL headache by somehow getting the Chicago steel in the OHL. With the ability to maintain NCAA eligibility, it is at least on par with London in its ability to recruit.
Detroit is 4 hrs away, London is 6.



Getting off topic (briefly), there can be 3 divisions of 7, a north-east grouping would have 9+ hrs for the outliers, but not as bad as the W or Q.

 

[Otto]

Alleviate the biggest USHL headache by somehow getting the Chicago steel in the OHL. With the ability to maintain NCAA eligibility, it is at least on par with London in its ability to recruit.
Detroit is 4 hrs away, London is 6.



Getting off topic (briefly), there can be 3 divisions of 7, a north-east grouping would have 9+ hrs for the outliers, but not as bad as the W or Q.

If The Steel were to join the OHL they players would no longer have the ability to retain their NCAA eligibility.

I think the logistics of this would be impossible for a league that is already on financially shaky ground

 

[dirty12]

If The Steel were to join the OHL they players would no longer have the ability to retain their NCAA eligibility.

I think the logistics of this would be impossible for a league that is already on financially shaky ground

I’m suggesting Chicago in the OHL would be value added as much for its financial stability as the players it attracts and as the marquee franchise, it’s departure from the USHL would be severely damaging.
Unless a kid probably playing at a prep school like St. Andrews can play for Harvard without being a star player, the OHL educational gold package is as guaranteed as it gets imo.

 

[Otto]

I’m suggesting Chicago in the OHL would be value added for the players it attracts and as the marquee franchise, it’s departure from the USHL would be severely damaging

Why do they attract those players? Is part of it because they can keep their NCAA eligibility? If so then if they joined the OHL they would no longer attract those players

 

[dirty12]

Why do they attract those players? Is part of it because they can keep their NCAA eligibility? If so then if they joined the OHL they would no longer attract those players

because I believe four years of guaranteed tuition, books, board just for signing a gold package deal is far more of a certainty than a US scholarship deal

 

[Otto]

because I believe four years of guaranteed tuition, books, board just for signing a gold package deal is far more of a certainty than a US scholarship deal

The top players joining the UHSL are generally committed to NCAA schools before they join are they not?

The gold package is there right now and they choose the UHSL, why would they switch just because Chicago is in the OHL?

 

[dirty12]

The top players joining the UHSL are generally committed to NCAA schools before they join are they not?

some, a little more fair now that schools cannot contact kids before 16. Power & Fantili likely signed with Chicago for at least equal exposure, possibly best funded team, play on an all-star team, (and) keep eligibility. Newhook and Barr went BCHL and St. Andrews to start.

 

[member 71782]

I like the idea of trading 1st round picks, always have but I don't think there should be restrictions on them. Some teams go multiple years without a 2nd round pick but there's no restrictions on those so why restrict 1sts? The only real limits on trading picks right now is teams can't trade 1sts, import picks or beyond the 4 year window. Same rules should apply to all picks. It should be up to organizations to control their GMs and how they deal.

While a team trading multiple 1st round picks could be argued they could end up in trouble the same is said that teams trading multiple 2nds/3rds could be in trouble already so what's the difference? There's lots of 1st round talent not taken in the 1st round already and the argument is reporting issues so teams won't take a chance on those players. If a team that can usually get a 1st round talent later without reporting issues then it ups the stakes in terms of when they'll have to draft those players so if they have multiple 1sts chances are they'll use them and obtaining those 1sts will likely come at a higher cost to them as well. It's not as if they'll be able to add more 1sts for nothing.

For a rebuilding team adding multiple 1sts will help to speed up their rebuild as well. Imagine a team like Kingston who doesn't have a ton of picks in their cupboard had been able to deal their 1st instead of picking Wright. They could have likely dealt that pick for multiple 1sts and 2nds to a team in a better situation than they were at the time which would have benefitted both Wright and Kingston. Kingston would have restocked their cupboard with the chance to add multiple 1st round talents in the draft while Wright could have been with a team more prepared to contend.

Just like recouping 2nds, 1sts will be recoverable after any run a team makes unless they have a team full of 19 year olds with no assets left to deal in which case that becomes a poorly managed team incapable of managing their assets. It's just another pick, yes it has higher value which means 2nds/3rds probably won't get traded as much or as many or if they do it would likely be in other deals. They also become a valuable tool when restocking the cupboards. A team that has their 1st but have traded most of their 2nds/3rds for the next 4 years can trade their 1st and recover multiple 1sts/2nds/3rds in some combination prior to the draft depending on the talent available in any given draft.

GMs are hired to build winning teams, let them have all the tools available to do so. If they have ambitions beyond the OHL then let them learn how to deal like a GM at the next level will be expected to. The only restriction I agree with on any draft picks is the 4 year window. Let's face it, trading picks a decade out makes no sense if people want to continue to look at the OHL as a cyclical league, 2 1/2 cycles out makes no sense.

 

[OMG67]

Not to sound hyperbolic but I think the CHL is in big trouble. Pre pandemic the league was not getting the talent it used to. Many teams struggling financially.

The USHL was a good league before all this and now they are getting an influx of players from Canada for obvious reasons. Plus you maintain your NCAA eligibility playing in that league. I fear it’s only a matter of time before more or most Canadian players go south for development, pandemic or no pandemic.

I am not going to open up the can of worms we have seen on here in the past with respect to CHL vs USHL/NCAA. That would be a separate topic and separate thread.

What I will say to counter your arguement is:
1> USA hockey in general is growing rather quick. As far as I am aware, enrolment is increasing as more kids are attracted tot he game.
2> As more and more kids become attracted to hockey, the volume of home grown World Class junior aged players increases.

IF these two statements hold true, the US based programs will reduce the recruiting of Canadian born players. Of course they will still try to recruit the cream of the crop talent. This is true; however, the overall value of the CHL member leagues is the balance of overall volume of skill level and competitiveness that helps keep the leagues viable year over year.

As USA hockey grows, the USHL’s need for Canadian middle lineup players lessens and those kids that “aren’t quite big enough” or “are late bloomers” will no longer be needed in the USHL. They will have enough of those home grown players to fill out rosters. They will only try to recruit the top 5% of Canadian 16-17 year olds. These are players that would be 1st and 2nd round OHL guys. The days of USHL teams recruiting Ontario players picked in the 3rd round and later will be coming to an end over the next 5-10 years.

By extension, so will Full Ride NCAA scholarships to the Tier I schools.

 

[dirty12]

I like the idea of trading 1st round picks, always have but I don't think there should be restrictions on them. Some teams go multiple years without a 2nd round pick but there's no restrictions on those so why restrict 1sts? The only real limits on trading picks right now is teams can't trade 1sts, import picks or beyond the 4 year window. Same rules should apply to all picks. It should be up to organizations to control their GMs and how they deal.

While a team trading multiple 1st round picks could be argued they could end up in trouble the same is said that teams trading multiple 2nds/3rds could be in trouble already so what's the difference? There's lots of 1st round talent not taken in the 1st round already and the argument is reporting issues so teams won't take a chance on those players. If a team that can usually get a 1st round talent later without reporting issues then it ups the stakes in terms of when they'll have to draft those players so if they have multiple 1sts chances are they'll use them and obtaining those 1sts will likely come at a higher cost to them as well. It's not as if they'll be able to add more 1sts for nothing.

For a rebuilding team adding multiple 1sts will help to speed up their rebuild as well. Imagine a team like Kingston who doesn't have a ton of picks in their cupboard had been able to deal their 1st instead of picking Wright. They could have likely dealt that pick for multiple 1sts and 2nds to a team in a better situation than they were at the time which would have benefitted both Wright and Kingston. Kingston would have restocked their cupboard with the chance to add multiple 1st round talents in the draft while Wright could have been with a team more prepared to contend.

Just like recouping 2nds, 1sts will be recoverable after any run a team makes unless they have a team full of 19 year olds with no assets left to deal in which case that becomes a poorly managed team incapable of managing their assets. It's just another pick, yes it has higher value which means 2nds/3rds probably won't get traded as much or as many or if they do it would likely be in other deals. They also become a valuable tool when restocking the cupboards. A team that has their 1st but have traded most of their 2nds/3rds for the next 4 years can trade their 1st and recover multiple 1sts/2nds/3rds in some combination prior to the draft depending on the talent available in any given draft.

GMs are hired to build winning teams, let them have all the tools available to do so. If they have ambitions beyond the OHL then let them learn how to deal like a GM at the next level will be expected to. The only restriction I agree with on any draft picks is the 4 year window. Let's face it, trading picks a decade out makes no sense if people want to continue to look at the OHL as a cyclical league, 2 1/2 cycles out makes no sense.

Fantili would be a great example for your point. I don’t think anyone trades away an attraction such as Tavares, McDavid, Wright that had agreed to report wherever they are drafted.
The problem with trading 1sts prior to the draft imo, is the loss of the defect rule which I believe to be the great equalizer

 

[deleteme2468]

You can't really disagree the last 2 NHL drafts the OHL has produced 10 NHL 1st round picks (since this is an OHL board). Obviously 2021 is up for grabs, who knows if there is a season but the highest OHL pick would probably Clarke?? After that we are talking McTavish/Chayka?? Probably not the greatest look for the league. Might be time to rebrand and evolve. Most likely the #1 pick or #2 pick will be from Ontario but he won't play a minute in the OHL.

Not sure what can be done - I’m not smart enough to know.

One of the biggest selling points for the OHL, and I guess, the CHL was that they were the best development league for the NHL. Also the quickest route to the NHL.

Best is subjective. Plenty of players do not need to play major junior in Canada to have a successful NHL career. Personally, I would think training and skills development is more important than playing a watered down OHL team on a Wednesday in February. Just one example.

Quickest? That may actually serve as a disadvantage for a lot of players. With the USHL and NCAA route, you can take a couple more years to develop and get bigger and turn pro at 22 whereas in the CHL you turn pro at 20 whether you are ready or not ready for the next level. If you play an overage year of major junior at 20 while you turn 21 in the new year, you are playing against teenagers and likely not being challenged enough on a consistent basis. In the NCAA, you get to play against people more your age without being shellshocked against a team full of seasoned pros.

I’ve never liked the age gap in major junior. Too hard for 16/17 year olds and too easy for 19/20 year olds.

As I said, I don’t know what can be done but I do believe major junior hockey is in deep trouble and on a quicker route to change (or collapse) than most people realize or want to admit. Maybe a handful of OHL cities can join the USHL one day but that isn’t a solution either. Many small to mid market cities in Ontario would not get that opportunity and that is not good.

 

[deleteme2468]

I am not going to open up the can of worms we have seen on here in the past with respect to CHL vs USHL/NCAA. That would be a separate topic and separate thread.

What I will say to counter your arguement is:
1> USA hockey in general is growing rather quick. As far as I am aware, enrolment is increasing as more kids are attracted tot he game.
2> As more and more kids become attracted to hockey, the volume of home grown World Class junior aged players increases.

IF these two statements hold true, the US based programs will reduce the recruiting of Canadian born players. Of course they will still try to recruit the cream of the crop talent. This is true; however, the overall value of the CHL member leagues is the balance of overall volume of skill level and competitiveness that helps keep the leagues viable year over year.

As USA hockey grows, the USHL’s need for Canadian middle lineup players lessens and those kids that “aren’t quite big enough” or “are late bloomers” will no longer be needed in the USHL. They will have enough of those home grown players to fill out rosters. They will only try to recruit the top 5% of Canadian 16-17 year olds. These are players that would be 1st and 2nd round OHL guys. The days of USHL teams recruiting Ontario players picked in the 3rd round and later will be coming to an end over the next 5-10 years.

By extension, so will Full Ride NCAA scholarships to the Tier I schools.

I like this post but I will bow out because I realize I may have hijacked this thread.

I just want to see major junior hockey not only survive in Canada but get stronger.

Cheers all.