Toggle sidebar

2008 Born for the 2024 OHL Draft

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Petes1987 said:
I am not sure how true the reports are that Colin Fitzgerald is not going to play in the OHL. According to an article in the Peterborough Examiner today he talks about the draft and possibly going 2nd overall with the reports that Sarnia is going to draft him with the 2nd pick and is looking forward to possibly matching the record of being Peterborough born player drafted the earliest in the draft. There is no mention of him going another route other than the OHL and I draw the conclusion from reading the article that he intends to play in the OHL.
Click to expand...


Whatever Green Bay offered him must've been unbelievable. All yr he's been adamant how badly he wanted to play in the OHL & follow his dad's footsteps.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: flamebird
StingUpdates said:


Whatever Green Bay offered him must've been unbelievable. All yr he's been adamant how badly he wanted to play in the OHL & follow his dad's footsteps.
Click to expand...

If he is tendered does that mean he has to go play for Green Bay or can he change his mind and play in the OHL? The Peterborough Examiner articles that was posted today tells another story. I don’t think it is right for the USHL to try and recruit players who have indicated they are going to play in the OHL.
 
Petes1987 said:
If he is tendered does that mean he has to go play for Green Bay or can he change his mind and play in the OHL? The Peterborough Examiner articles that was posted today tells another story. I don’t think it is right for the USHL to try and recruit players who have indicated they are going to play in the OHL.
Click to expand...
He can change his mind. Rehkopf is the most recent example I can think of. Greenbay would lose a 1st or 2nd round pick tho depending on what slot they used. They took down the article
 
Krangers08 said:
He can change his mind. Rehkopf is the most recent example I can think of. Greenbay would lose a 1st or 2nd round pick tho depending on what slot they used. They took down the article
Click to expand...
I notice that when I clicked on the link. I wonder if he has changed his mind and us know going to play in the OHL. I don’t know if the Petes have him as a possibility because until recently he was not considered to be in the top five pick. I am starting to think the Petes may take Alessandro Di Iorio with the 3rd overall pick if he is still available. If he is not do they take Brady Smith?
 
HockeyPops said:
This seems like a simplistic view.

The biggest problem with the CHL education package is you only have 18 months to decide to use it or lose it. You are forced to pick between hockey and school before you have really given hockey a fair shake. Also, you end up at school almost as a mature student. Every other first year is 18, you are 21-22. There are lots of nuances that go into the decision of which path is right for each individual. CHL is not the only answer, and it's not always the right answer.
Click to expand...

A few other things to consider.

One thing I’ve heard from players before is that when you take the NCAA route to get your education and play, you’re doing so on a high. There’s such great optimism about your career and you’re going with the intention of being a pro hockey player, but also getting a great “back up plan.” Where as when you are using your CHL education package and playing CIS it’s more of a “fall back plan” in the sense that you’re now going to school as someone who failed to make it as a pro player after your CHL career didn’t secure you a pro career. Not saying I agree with that mindset. The CIS is better hockey than it gets credit for and tons of players become pro’s around the world after. However I do understand the mindset because it does significantly decrease your odds of being an NHL player.

The other thing is just that the window for NHL attraction is so much larger. Some agents and advisors are pushing the NCAA route because even if you’re not drafted, you’re going to school and NHL eyes will be on you for a large period of time. Basically you're being heavily scouted from 17-24. Allows for improvement and maturation, which is non linear and different for every person. Let me give you an example to back up what some agents are suggesting. We'll call them Player A. Player A is a highly touted young hockey player that goes to the NCAA route. He signs an NCAA scholarship agreement early and plays in the USHL. However, he struggles with the adjustment and is a USHL role player for two years. Not on the NHL radar. But as a 20 year old in the USHL, he finally plays better. Not an elite level, but much improved. Still not drafted, but he's going to a great school and is going to make this adjustment with a ton of confidence. At the NCAA level, he improves every year and ends up signing an NHL deal after his junior year at 23. Now...let's look at what happens with Player A if they take the CHL route. They struggle with the adjustment to the OHL and are limited to being a role player early on. That probably means they end up being moved to another team for a fresh start by their 19 year old season. If they're still struggling, they may not even have a place in the league as a 20 year old (OA). Then it's the OJHL and to the CIS to use your education package. Maybe that's when he's physically mature enough to be at his best, but he didn't attract a bigger CIS school because he wasn't a former CHL standout. That means his attention from the NHL is nearly non existent.

The last thing to mention here has already been touched on. Players going the NCAA route have so much more autonomy. The Transfer Portal has been a game changer for that. You don't like the school or coach you picked first? Change teams and you get to hand pick the new school you want to attend. Heck, you could even decide to go the CHL route after all, if you regret your choice...like Justin Ertel recently, who signed with Dallas recently.

Look, as someone who has covered the OHL for decades, it definitely hurts to see so many high end kids leaving the last few years. However, I do completely understand why they are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: All the Answers, Slowpace, frontsfan67 and 7 others
Brock said:
A few other things to consider.

One thing I’ve heard from players before is that when you take the NCAA route to get your education and play, you’re doing so on a high. There’s such great optimism about your career and you’re going with the intention of being a pro hockey player, but also getting a great “back up plan.” Where as when you are using your CHL education package and playing CIS it’s more of a “fall back plan” in the sense that you’re now going to school as someone who failed to make it as a pro player after your CHL career didn’t secure you a pro career. Not saying I agree with that mindset. The CIS is better hockey than it gets credit for and tons of players become pro’s around the world after. However I do understand the mindset because it does significantly decrease your odds of being an NHL player.

The other thing is just that the window for NHL attraction is so much larger. Some agents and advisors are pushing the NCAA route because even if you’re not drafted, you’re going to school and NHL eyes will be on you for a large period of time. Basically you're being heavily scouted from 17-24. Allows for improvement and maturation, which is non linear and different for every person. Let me give you an example to back up what some agents are suggesting. We'll call them Player A. Player A is a highly touted young hockey player that goes to the NCAA route. He signs an NCAA scholarship agreement early and plays in the USHL. However, he struggles with the adjustment and is a USHL role player for two years. Not on the NHL radar. But as a 20 year old in the USHL, he finally plays better. Not an elite level, but much improved. Still not drafted, but he's going to a great school and is going to make this adjustment with a ton of confidence. At the NCAA level, he improves every year and ends up signing an NHL deal after his junior year at 23. Now...let's look at what happens with Player A if they take the CHL route. They struggle with the adjustment to the OHL and are limited to being a role player early on. That probably means they end up being moved to another team for a fresh start by their 19 year old season. If they're still struggling, they may not even have a place in the league as a 20 year old (OA). Then it's the OJHL and to the CIS to use your education package. Maybe that's when he's physically mature enough to be at his best, but he didn't attract a bigger CIS school because he wasn't a former CHL standout. That means his attention from the NHL is nearly non existent.

The last thing to mention here has already been touched on. Players going the NCAA route have so much more autonomy. The Transfer Portal has been a game changer for that. You don't like the school or coach you picked first? Change teams and you get to hand pick the new school you want to attend. Heck, you could even decide to go the CHL route after all, if you regret your choice...like Justin Ertel recently, who signed with Dallas recently.

Look, as someone who has covered the OHL for decades, it definitely hurts to see so many high end kids leaving the last few years. However, I do completely understand why they are.
Click to expand...
Great insight. Do you think that if the restriction of CHL players jumping to NCAA is lifted that it changes this thought process by players? Would they treat CHL as a place to develop 16-19, and the NCAA a place to train 20-22 if they don’t get a deal?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mcnotloilersfan, Section5Petes and RB76
One thing that I think we need to take into consideration. Not every CHL player is going to make Pro. It is a very few %. There are only a handful of kids that will make the jump in their early 20 to the NHL. Others may never make it. At 16, they have aspirations and agents telling them they are the next Mathews, if they dont tell them that, the player changes agents. So there is a lot of hope and entitlement for first rounders. Llook at the 2018 draft or the 2017 OHL 1st rounders. Very limited players made NHL impact. Even the ones that committed to NCAA in draft year very few made it. ITs all about perspective. Majority of players wont get scouted to NCAA, so option is CHL to develop for 4 years and if that doesnt work, have their education paid for. If the new NCAA/CHL agreement can be worked out, will give younger players more options, and older players a third route.
 
Brock said:
A few other things to consider.

One thing I’ve heard from players before is that when you take the NCAA route to get your education and play, you’re doing so on a high. There’s such great optimism about your career and you’re going with the intention of being a pro hockey player, but also getting a great “back up plan.” Where as when you are using your CHL education package and playing CIS it’s more of a “fall back plan” in the sense that you’re now going to school as someone who failed to make it as a pro player after your CHL career didn’t secure you a pro career. Not saying I agree with that mindset. The CIS is better hockey than it gets credit for and tons of players become pro’s around the world after. However I do understand the mindset because it does significantly decrease your odds of being an NHL player.

The other thing is just that the window for NHL attraction is so much larger. Some agents and advisors are pushing the NCAA route because even if you’re not drafted, you’re going to school and NHL eyes will be on you for a large period of time. Basically you're being heavily scouted from 17-24. Allows for improvement and maturation, which is non linear and different for every person. Let me give you an example to back up what some agents are suggesting. We'll call them Player A. Player A is a highly touted young hockey player that goes to the NCAA route. He signs an NCAA scholarship agreement early and plays in the USHL. However, he struggles with the adjustment and is a USHL role player for two years. Not on the NHL radar. But as a 20 year old in the USHL, he finally plays better. Not an elite level, but much improved. Still not drafted, but he's going to a great school and is going to make this adjustment with a ton of confidence. At the NCAA level, he improves every year and ends up signing an NHL deal after his junior year at 23. Now...let's look at what happens with Player A if they take the CHL route. They struggle with the adjustment to the OHL and are limited to being a role player early on. That probably means they end up being moved to another team for a fresh start by their 19 year old season. If they're still struggling, they may not even have a place in the league as a 20 year old (OA). Then it's the OJHL and to the CIS to use your education package. Maybe that's when he's physically mature enough to be at his best, but he didn't attract a bigger CIS school because he wasn't a former CHL standout. That means his attention from the NHL is nearly non existent.

The last thing to mention here has already been touched on. Players going the NCAA route have so much more autonomy. The Transfer Portal has been a game changer for that. You don't like the school or coach you picked first? Change teams and you get to hand pick the new school you want to attend. Heck, you could even decide to go the CHL route after all, if you regret your choice...like Justin Ertel recently, who signed with Dallas recently.

Look, as someone who has covered the OHL for decades, it definitely hurts to see so many high end kids leaving the last few years. However, I do completely understand why they are.
Click to expand...
Regarding player A; ‘at 20 playing in the USHL he is not elite but better, and educated at a great school’. His schooling is covered by the USHL team or school committed to but not playing for?
At 18 OHL players can be taking classes from U of T, McGill, Queens, …covered by the OHL education package right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: frontsfan67
Who will be the first Flyer to go?
I’m picking Croskery even tho players just don’t decommit from Chicago
 
I wonder if Beckham Edwards might be an early flyer. He was Youngstown's second tender of the season, so it only cost them a 2nd. In the news release Beckham talks about how he took a really long time to decide.
 
How does the Tendering process work int he USHL? I assume if they go outside their draft and tender a player, they forfeit their first round pick and consecutive picks for multiple players, correct?

If a tendered player does not end up coming, does the team get a comp pick at a later date or are the USHL teams simply rolling the dice?

Maybe a Tender process would work for the OHL? It would at least are the process above board. If a team like London were to draft a high ranked player and get them to commit, it is no different than tendering the player and forfeiting their pick. Players have a bit more of a say in where they go and teams can’t play tricks later in the draft.
 
OMG67 said:
How does the Tendering process work int he USHL? I assume if they go outside their draft and tender a player, they forfeit their first round pick and consecutive picks for multiple players, correct?

If a tendered player does not end up coming, does the team get a comp pick at a later date or are the USHL teams simply rolling the dice?

Maybe a Tender process would work for the OHL? It would at least are the process above board. If a team like London were to draft a high ranked player and get them to commit, it is no different than tendering the player and forfeiting their pick. Players have a bit more of a say in where they go and teams can’t play tricks later in the draft.
Click to expand...
From what I've gathered, the USHL has two drafts, one for 16 year olds (Phase I or "Futures" on EP), and then one for any other junior aged player (Phase II or "Entry" on EP) not on a protected list (I assume this is similar to the OHL's lists?).

Tenders apply for the Phase I draft - teams can tender up to 2 players in exchange for their first two picks (first tender is first round, second tender is second round) - and those players are required to be on the roster and play in 55% of games (I think this is a key piece).

I think the draft picks are surrendered as soon as the pick is signed so there is a risk - for example when Rehkopf stayed in the OHL - I doesn't look like Muskegon got any kind of compensation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OMG67
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: frontsfan67, ohloutsider and Section5Petes
leafs4life94 said:
From what I've gathered, the USHL has two drafts, one for 16 year olds (Phase I or "Futures" on EP), and then one for any other junior aged player (Phase II or "Entry" on EP) not on a protected list (I assume this is similar to the OHL's lists?).

Tenders apply for the Phase I draft - teams can tender up to 2 players in exchange for their first two picks (first tender is first round, second tender is second round) - and those players are required to be on the roster and play in 55% of games (I think this is a key piece).

I think the draft picks are surrendered as soon as the pick is signed so there is a risk - for example when Rehkopf stayed in the OHL - I doesn't look like Muskegon got any kind of compensation.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I haven’t had an opportunity to think through that process for the OHL but I can see some benefits of adopting something similar here.

In some respects, I would like to see the OHL go back to the same style of draft they used to have where they could only pick underage players through the 4th or 5th round. Then they can only pick the 17+ players. But, if there were a tender process involved, the 16 year olds opt into the OHL Draft “Phase One” and get a chance to negotiate their destination. Of course, it would lead to certain teams getting a stud player every year but in many cases the true ranked players aren’t picked din order anyway. We could also make the sacrifice bigger. For example, if a team were to pick 15th to 20th, they lose a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd to tender a player whereas a team that picks 1st through 5th only loses their 1st round pick. So, if a team like London were to have the 20th pick in the draft and wanted to tender the best player, they lose three picks to do it. Some sort of weighting to reduce the advantage.

Again, I haven’t thought this through but considering there is already a lot of gamesmanship involved, we may as well give in and find a solution through something like a tender process.
 
Any word on where Valentini is going in the USHL? The reports said it was both him and Fitzgerald going there but only one has signed a tender. I have a funny feeling that Valentini is bluffing to get to a certain team
 
  • Like
Reactions: frontsfan67
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom