CHL can now play NCAA - change everything !

[4thline]

And for the ones that aren’t, the CHL would have to drop the idea of not releasing their players before age 20. The ones that aren’t playing NCAA next year are almost certainly only spending next year in junior (or if 1 or 2 spend two more in junior they basically suck).

How long does this hold true? A couple years of high quality CHL grads- whether or not they play their OA junior year- displacing tier II and III depth from the NCAA is going to raise the quality of play.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

How long does this hold true? A couple years of high quality CHL grads- whether or not they play their OA junior year- displacing tier II and III depth from the NCAA is going to raise the quality of play.

How long does it hold true that NTDP players are going to want to play NCAA before age 20?

Well, I’d assume until the landscape is drastically more changed than the current rumored changes.

Players will generally want to play at the highest level possible. Whether that’s feasible for all of them is a different set of considerations, but of course the .1% of teenage athletes believe in their capabilities and think they can always accomplish more than they probably realistically can.

And I don’t see NTDP players being the ones that are pushed out by CHL players joining the NCAA. For the most part, NTDP players are the elite of the elite that college hockey usually pulls in.

 

[Hockeyville USA]

How long does it hold true that NTDP players are going to want to play NCAA before age 20?

Well, I’d assume until the landscape is drastically more changed than the current rumored changes.

Players will generally want to play at the highest level possible. Whether that’s feasible is a different set of considerations.

And I don’t see NTDP players being the ones that are pushed out by CHL players joining the NCAA. For the most part, NTDP players are the elite of the elite that college hockey usually pulls in.

Yep, the guys that will be pushed out are Tier 2 or 3 talents from places like Howell Michigan, Stillwater Minnesota, Arlington Massachusetts, Hicksville New York, etc who were low level USHL players and/or top end NAHL players.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Players will generally want to play at the highest level possible.

Speaking in the most generalized terms, sure. But I think people also shouldn't view players that are 16 through the lens of professional hockey players trying to play in the NHL. There are a lot more factors involved pertaining to family, culture and education. It's not like all the best 12 year olds move to play in the GTHL for instance, even though it's the "best".

 

[4thline]

How long does it hold true that NTDP players are going to want to play NCAA before age 20?

How long does it hold true that any NTDP player that could still benefit from a CHL season / isn't a NCAA shoe-in at U20 "basically sucks"

This change stands to make the NCAA stronger for sure, and early indications are that the CHL will become stronger as well.

Yep, the guys that will be pushed out are Tier 2 or 3 talents from places like Howell Michigan, Stillwater Minnesota, Arlington Massachusetts, Hicksville New York, etc who were low level USHL players and/or top end NAHL players.

First order impact vs. 2nd order.

1. CHL guys push those ones out, NCAA gets better via new talent pool.
2. 4 year tier IIA NCAA commits shift to CHL, develop more through better competition, NCAA gets better via existing talent pool arriving better developed
3. Players from 2 raise quality of play in CHL and lower it in leagues they're departing
4. Do the players that were formally 2 year juniors develop well enough in their now weakened leagues to jump to the now stronger NCAA at 18 and 19? Or does their decision making change

There is a clear path where the quality threshold between the 2 year and 4 year junior NCAA committed player rises, and the number of U19 and U20 freshmen lowers.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

How long does it hold true that any NTDP player that could still benefit from a CHL season / isn't a NCAA shoe-in at U20 "basically sucks"

It’s not just CHL. The ones that need to spend more than a year of junior after being drafted before going to the NCAA, most of which end up currently being those who currently will play USHL, are the types of players at don’t get drafted or are very inconsequential draft selections over time. Go check the list and amount of NHL’ers who didn’t play NCAA until their third season after being drafted. Very few and usually the types of players that had to fight their way into low level NHL’ers.

So sure, maybe they are a market inefficiency that CHL can scoop up. They may end up helping CHL teams, if they can scoop them up. Junior hockey has plenty of good players for its level who don’t end up pro hockey players. Was merely saying in general that those types of players are those that pretty much no one outside of the truest of diehards will have heard of.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

How long does it hold true that any NTDP player that could still benefit from a CHL season / isn't a NCAA shoe-in at U20 "basically sucks"

This change stands to make the NCAA stronger for sure, and early indications are that the CHL will become stronger as well.


First order impact vs. 2nd order.

1. CHL guys push those ones out, NCAA gets better via new talent pool.
2. 4 year tier IIA NCAA commits shift to CHL, develop more through better competition, NCAA gets better via existing talent pool arriving better developed
3. Players from 2 raise quality of play in CHL and lower it in leagues they're departing
4. Do the players that were formally 2 year juniors develop well enough in their now weakened leagues to jump to the now stronger NCAA at 18 and 19? Or does their decision making change

There is a clear path where the quality threshold between the 2 year and 4 year junior NCAA committed player rises, and the number of U19 and U20 freshmen lowers.

Okay and this is maybe something that might happen, but I think you are being presumptive about a few things I don’t see as a given.

Also, I don’t think even if there’s an impact that it makes a big difference on the average players progression. The reality is that the majority just either have the hockey talent at like 16 or 17 to be on a path to playing NCAA at 17-19 or they don’t. Usually is pretty cut and dry.

 

[4thline]

It’s not just CHL. The ones that need to spend more than a year of junior after being drafted before going to the NCAA, most of which end up currently being those who currently will play USHL, are the types of players at don’t get drafted or are very inconsequential draft selections over time. Go check the list and amount of NHL’ers who didn’t play NCAA until their third season after being drafted. Very few and usually the types of players that had to fight their way into low level NHL’ers.

None of the past includes an NCAA bolstered by CHL graduates, and previous NCAA feeder leagues weakened by CHL experience being allowed.

 

[Corso]

Some informative discussions with Bob Turow on Dan K







Bob feels that the NCAA needs to get younger, but I just don't see that happening.