CHL Can Now Play NCAA - Changes Everything

[MS]

Its still early.

For instance, Ryan Miller from Portland (WHL) committed to Denver and could play next year. We will see how many current players depart. They have moved up deferrals before (see Hagen Burrows).

Misa and Martone have been rumored to be considering NCAA for a while. Michigan has an unusual number of open spots for 2025-26. BU may as well.

We will have to wait for the matchmaking dominoes to fall.

I'll still be surprised if we see either Misa or Martone in the NCAA next year once they get drafted and talk to NHL teams. History would suggest that both are probably at least 50/50 to be in the NHL in October as top-5 picks. Especially Martone as a 2006 with size. It would be a hell of a thing for either to say 'nah, I'm not gonna try and make the NHL next year'.

There are obviously dominoes to fall and there will be guys that move, but I think some people here are *massively* over-estimating how many age 18-20 CHLers will move.

 

[wickedwitch]

I'll still be surprised if we see either Misa or Martone in the NCAA next year once they get drafted and talk to NHL teams. History would suggest that both are probably at least 50/50 to be in the NHL in October as top-5 picks. Especially Martone as a 2006 with size. It would be a hell of a thing for either to say 'nah, I'm not gonna try and make the NHL next year'.

There are obviously dominoes to fall and there will be guys that move, but I think some people here are *massively* over-estimating how many age 18-20 CHLers will move.

Multiple NCAA players every year decide exactly that.

I'm not saying anything about specific players, because I don't know anything beyond the fact that they are considering the NCAA, but every year many players turn down ELCs and multiple players turn down a chance at the NHL to play in the NCAA. Misa or Martone playing in the NCAA would not be some super rare exception.

 

[MS]

Multiple NCAA players every year decide exactly that.

I'm not saying anything about specific players, because I don't know anything beyond the fact that they are considering the NCAA, but every year many players turn down ELCs and multiple players turn down a chance at the NHL to play in the NCAA. Misa or Martone playing in the NCAA would not be some super rare exception.

Very few top-5 picks do. Neither Celebrini nor Levshunov stayed in the NCAA last year. And it's a different thing to *stay* in the NCAA as opposed to going to the NCAA.

Over the past 10 years, roughly 50% of top-5 picks play in the NHL in their draft+1. This is the thing these guys have been fixated on their whole lives. They're going to have NHL ELCs in front of them, NHL teams who want them to come to camp, and they'll know their chances of playing in the NHL are pretty high. I suspect any NCAA commitments for Misa/Martone are much more of a fallback option than a priority.

 

[wickedwitch]

Very few top-5 picks do. Neither Celebrini nor Levshunov stayed in the NCAA last year. And it's a different thing to *stay* in the NCAA as opposed to going to the NCAA.

Over the past 10 years, roughly 50% of top-5 picks play in the NHL in their draft+1. This is the thing these guys have been fixated on their whole lives. They're going to have NHL ELCs in front of them, NHL teams who want them to come to camp, and they'll know their chances of playing in the NHL are pretty high. I suspect any NCAA commitments for Misa/Martone are much more of a fallback option than a priority.

Yes, staying in the NCAA is different than switching, so I'm not sure why Celebrini or Levshunov are relevant.

Players drafted top 5 from the CHL, like Martone or Misa, previously had 2 choices: NHL or CHL. Now they have a 3rd choice. So the previous percentages irrelevant. It's like trying to figure out what percentage of people will choose strawberry if the choices are between vanilla, chocolate, and strawberry when the only data you have is what percentage favors vanilla over chocolate.

 

[TheBeastCoast]

Yes, staying in the NCAA is different than switching, so I'm not sure why Celebrini or Levshunov are relevant.

Players drafted top 5 from the CHL, like Martone or Misa, previously had 2 choices: NHL or CHL. Now they have a 3rd choice. So the previous percentages irrelevant. It's like trying to figure out what percentage of people will choose strawberry if the choices are between vanilla, chocolate, and strawberry when the only data you have is what percentage favors vanilla over chocolate.

It does seem unlikely that many CHL top 5/10 picks will decide against attempting to make the NHL to switch leagues and play NCAA for the first time. I am sure there will be outliers but I doubt it becomes the norm.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Even with undrafted 2005s right now, there have been virtually zero commits for the 25-26 season (is Tulk the only one?) and most of those guys are going for the 26-27 after completing their overage CHL season.

Not every kid makes it to OA. Especially in the Q since not that many kids get drafted. All of that will need to be sorted out in offseason (which is normal anyways). Obviously the kids that can’t make an OA spot aren’t going to be in the highest of demands. Typically many of those would jump to junior a for age 20 season. Maybe some more jump to ushl nahl or BCHL as the traditional ncaa feeders now.

 

[Kingpin794]

Multiple NCAA players every year decide exactly that.

I'm not saying anything about specific players, because I don't know anything beyond the fact that they are considering the NCAA, but every year many players turn down ELCs and multiple players turn down a chance at the NHL to play in the NCAA. Misa or Martone playing in the NCAA would not be some super rare exception.

And part of that is cultural. US kids often play at universities near where they grew up. It means something to those kids to go to those schools because it always been a dream for them. Someone can correct me, but Canadians aren't going to have that same cultural affinity to go to the NCAA instead of trying to make an NHL roster right away. There will be some for sure but don't think it will be at the same rate as Americans that come back in their D+1.

 

[SpeedyCerviche]

I still have a tough time thinking top end players will avoid signing a pro contract and all the perks, preseason games, training, get to FA earlier, etc that Congress with it vs play NCAA. I also think we are also on the verge of seeing underaged CHL players granted the ability to play in the AHL as well.
Now mid round players, sure. I can see some of them jumping college, especially if their NHL team doesn't have immediate plans to sign them.

 

[MS]

Yes, staying in the NCAA is different than switching, so I'm not sure why Celebrini or Levshunov are relevant.

Players drafted top 5 from the CHL, like Martone or Misa, previously had 2 choices: NHL or CHL. Now they have a 3rd choice. So the previous percentages irrelevant. It's like trying to figure out what percentage of people will choose strawberry if the choices are between vanilla, chocolate, and strawberry when the only data you have is what percentage favors vanilla over chocolate.

And again, I'll be very surprised if they choose to play NCAA hockey over a 50%+ chance of playing in the NHL.

I think if their drafted team tells them they have no chance of making the team, they'll be in the NCAA. They might use the NCAA commitment to try and leverage roster guarantees from their NHL team. But do I think for even a second that, given a choice, either would even for an instant prefer to be in the NCAA to the NHL? Not a chance.

 

[MS]

Not every kid makes it to OA. Especially in the Q since not that many kids get drafted. All of that will need to be sorted out in offseason (which is normal anyways). Obviously the kids that can’t make an OA spot aren’t going to be in the highest of demands. Typically many of those would jump to junior a for age 20 season. Maybe some more jump to ushl nahl or BCHL as the traditional ncaa feeders now.

Very few players who are tracking to be 25-26 OA players in the CHL have signed NCAA commitments instead of that. And while there might be a thing where age 18-19 guys don't want to announce that before the season ends, I highly doubt that stigma exists for potential OA players. Right now it looks like, generally speaking, 1995-born guys think that staying in the CHL is in their best interest and/or they have loyalty to their team/league and are mostly only willing to leave when their eligibility ends.

Obviously the guys who aren't even good enough to be OA players won't get NCAA offers.

 

[Herby]

Increasingly, D1 will be able to use CHL like a de facto farm league. The top talent will play in CHL at age 16 and 17 and then move to NCAA at age 18. The second tier will make the move at 19, third tier at 20, fourth tier at 21. It's mostly only CHL overage commitments that are being announced so far, probably as a courtesy while the CHL season is still going, but I expect a boatload of non-overage commitment announcements in the spring. Also expecting a bunch of USports player defections.

This is what I am hearing as well, but also that post 9/15 guys could go in their draft year, if they can get through NCAA clearing.

Almost every player situation the benefits to the NCAA outweigh the CHL.

The superstar 17/18 year old who wants to jump to the NHL in his D+1 will find older and tougher competition.

The 19 year old who has already dominated the CHL, isn't good enough for the NHL but isn't eligible for the AHL will immediately jump into the age 19 spot where so many NCAA prospects have been able to immediately jump into the NHL. I don't think the sophomore/freshman difference will make much of a difference for a guy like Lindstrom (as an example).

The 20 year old who still has pro aspirations, but was not signed after his age 19 season will impress NHL teams more if he can be impactful at the NCAA level than he would if he returns to junior and competes against kids again.

I think the talent level in the CHL is going to be greatly impacted, and I suspect that is why there are rumors of an extra import spot in the future.

 

[OSA]

As I've said a few times, I highly doubt the bolded.

There might be a few specific cases a year that jump, but the vast majority of drafted players are going to want to fast-track getting their ELC/signing bonus and get to NHL training camps and preseason games. And most NHL teams are going to want to get their hands on the player and get them into training/development camps.

And a lot of guys are just going to have loyalty to the team/league they're in - they've been mentally committed to winning that championship, they'll have friends, billet families etc. they like and are familiar with and there is always a risk associated with a change.

Even with undrafted 2005s right now, there have been virtually zero commits for the 25-26 season (is Tulk the only one?) and most of those guys are going for the 26-27 after completing their overage CHL season.

I think Diego Buttazzoni is another one

 

[WarriorofTime]

Very few players who are tracking to be 25-26 OA players in the CHL have signed NCAA commitments instead of that. And while there might be a thing where age 18-19 guys don't want to announce that before the season ends, I highly doubt that stigma exists for potential OA players. Right now it looks like, generally speaking, 1995-born guys think that staying in the CHL is in their best interest and/or they have loyalty to their team/league and are mostly only willing to leave when their eligibility ends.

Obviously the guys who aren't even good enough to be OA players won't get NCAA offers.

I'm saying not every player gets offered an overage spot because teams can only ice 3 per game. Generally at the end of the season there's a bit of a waiting around period to see who is going to be sticking around so downstream guys can see if they'll have a spot to stick around another year. Then those that don't (most prevalent in Q that has the least 19 year olds getting signed to ELCs) have to figure out their plans (USports, Junior A, quit hockey, etc.)

 

[WarriorofTime]

And again, I'll be very surprised if they choose to play NCAA hockey over a 50%+ chance of playing in the NHL.

I think if their drafted team tells them they have no chance of making the team, they'll be in the NCAA. They might use the NCAA commitment to try and leverage roster guarantees from their NHL team. But do I think for even a second that, given a choice, either would even for an instant prefer to be in the NCAA to the NHL? Not a chance.

Very few kids make the NHL out of the CHL in their D+1. Besides if they go to NCAA and do well, they can sign a burn a year at the end to get in NHL games. I'm not saying everyone will do it, but there's certainly going to big allure for basically anyone but the like 1-2 guys that are pretty much locks to play in the NHL right away. Look at this year, maybe Schaefer, maybe Misa will play in NHL this year. Every other CHL prospect does not have a realistic expectation and their drafting team will likely inform them of that.

 

[WarriorofTime]

And part of that is cultural. US kids often play at universities near where they grew up. It means something to those kids to go to those schools because it always been a dream for them. Someone can correct me, but Canadians aren't going to have that same cultural affinity to go to the NCAA instead of trying to make an NHL roster right away. There will be some for sure but don't think it will be at the same rate as Americans that come back in their D+1.

At the end of the day, it's inevitable the top NCAA folks will be contacting the CHL kids and their families and selling their case. Previously they didn't have that option, so it'll be an interesting thing to see how many seem interested in the allure of it. I think it's inevitable many will be prior to exhausting all junior eligibility (if they'll have them) and that could create a domino effect.

 

[Herby]

I still have a tough time thinking top end players will avoid signing a pro contract and all the perks, preseason games, training, get to FA earlier, etc that Congress with it vs play NCAA. I also think we are also on the verge of seeing underaged CHL players granted the ability to play in the AHL as well.
Now mid round players, sure. I can see some of them jumping college, especially if their NHL team doesn't have immediate plans to sign them.

This may be the case, but until that day comes the reality is still that a player who has already played at a dominant level in the CHL at 18 is probably better off competing against older players in the NCAA if he doesn't make his NHL club than returning to play with his prey in the CHL. One recent example of this was Brandt Clarke, who was not challenged at all in the CHL in his age 19 season, and it certainly did cause damage to his development and his readiness to play in the NHL at 20.

NHL GM's have complained for years about this very situation, that they have to send 19 year olds who are very close to being NHL'ers back to a level they have already passed, this provides something of a bridge to that situation.

I also think you overrate the pre-season games stuff and some of those perks. We have seen countless college players who played no NHL pre-season games jump right into the NHL and not miss a beat (Luke & Quinn Hughes, Makar, Caufield, Knies, Faber, Beniers, Leonard), many of these guys jumping right into teams gearing up for the playoffs.

As far as contract, a player who plays two years of junior actually has his contract start a year later than the same player who plays two years of college and immediately signs (Luke Hughes and Brandt Clarke would be an example of this), and financially it's worse off because you sign the 2nd contract a year later. I am unaware of the CBA rules with regards to CHL players who would switch to the NCAA, my belief is they are locked into the CHL player status as far as contracts, but at best that would be a push as to when you get the 2nd contract (when real money begins). And also, while we aren't talking Bryce Underwood type NIL money, a top-end 1st round caliber talent is going to make some NIL money from the hockey programs with deep pocketed boosters, and again we aren't talking football/basketball, but there are some wealthy hockey fans who are going to support their alma mater's programs financially.

 

[Vilica]

I'm curious if even having a signed ELC is going to be a barrier to play NCAA in the next few years. Obviously playing regular-season or playoff NHL games would be a hard no to NCAA eligibility, and likely AHL games as well, but who's to say that the signing bonus couldn't be argued as a payment for NIL purposes. TBH, I think the agreement that the CBA/courts would uphold would be some sort of deferment of the signing bonus to preserve NCAA eligibility, were the player initially to be drafted out of the CHL, and continue his path into the NCAA.

The position I think where players will really be tempted to extend their NCAA time is goaltender. To give a prospect example I'm familiar with, take Garin Bjorklund, a late pick of the Capitals in 2020 who played 2 post-draft years in the WHL (COVID-affected), then missed almost a year due to injury, and is in his 2nd full year in the ECHL. Given the low pay at that level, he'd probably breakeven playing 2-3 years at a D1 school (especially if he played the transfer game well). The quality of play in the ECHL is better than the NCAA, but the perks of being a D1 athlete at a college outweigh the grind of ECHL road trips. NHL teams already have a general expectation that they're not going to get much if any value from goalies on ELC contracts, and NHL GMs would probably prefer to have 4-5 years to evaluate a goalie rather than the 2 they have now for Canadian kids. [To illustrate with another Capitals example, they drafted Mitchell Gibson out of the NAHL in 2018, and he played 1 USHL season and 3 seasons at Harvard before they signed him to an ELC.]

On that note, I think that negotiating how draft/signing rights extend with a CHL/NCAA transfer is going to be one of the interesting points of contention in the new CBA. How those rights follow a player is going to influence timeframes and university windows. You're going to get a very different profile if rights expire after 2 years or 4 years.

 

[MS]

Very few kids make the NHL out of the CHL in their D+1. Besides if they go to NCAA and do well, they can sign a burn a year at the end to get in NHL games. I'm not saying everyone will do it, but there's certainly going to big allure for basically anyone but the like 1-2 guys that are pretty much locks to play in the NHL right away. Look at this year, maybe Schaefer, maybe Misa will play in NHL this year. Every other CHL prospect does not have a realistic expectation and their drafting team will likely inform them of that.

Misa and Martone (who I was talking about) are very likely to be in the NHL next year. Especially Martone, given his older age and size/physical development/quality all-around game. I'd suspect he's probably closer to 75% to be in the NHL in October. To me it would be nuts for these guys to go to the NCAA if an NHL team is offering them an ELC and telling them they have a good chance of being in the NHL.

For guys who aren't top-5 picks ... yeah, they likely won't be in the NHL next year. But there's still a pretty huge pull in going to NHL camps, working with your NHL club, and getting your ELC signed and your signing bonus in your pocket. And I suspect that in most cases both the player's NHL club and agent will be pushing them to get their ELC signed and get going on their pro career even if it means more time in the CHL. Some guys will move, but again : I don't think it will be anywhere even close to as many as some here seem to think.

And there's this weird thing where people here seem to be acting like the NCAA is some obviously statistically superior development path ... and it just isn't. There's no real difference in terms of odds of making the NHL relative to draft position whether you play CHL or NCAA or Europe. For some guys maybe fewer games against a bit higher competition is better. For others slow-cooking in the CHL and dominating in huge minutes might be better. Some guys will be in good CHL systems, some will be in bad. Some guys might make good decisions to go to good NCAA programs, some might end up going to places that are a mess. But in the end ... it's all much the same thing, and talent will win out.

The other thing that's probably going to happen soon is a new CHL/NHL agreement where elite guys can go to the AHL and this will basically cut off at the knees these sorts of NCAA transfers for elite players in very short order.

 

[Blue and Green]

This is what I am hearing as well, but also that post 9/15 guys could go in their draft year, if they can get through NCAA clearing.

Almost every player situation the benefits to the NCAA outweigh the CHL.

The superstar 17/18 year old who wants to jump to the NHL in his D+1 will find older and tougher competition.

The 19 year old who has already dominated the CHL, isn't good enough for the NHL but isn't eligible for the AHL will immediately jump into the age 19 spot where so many NCAA prospects have been able to immediately jump into the NHL. I don't think the sophomore/freshman difference will make much of a difference for a guy like Lindstrom (as an example).

The 20 year old who still has pro aspirations, but was not signed after his age 19 season will impress NHL teams more if he can be impactful at the NCAA level than he would if he returns to junior and competes against kids again.

I think the talent level in the CHL is going to be greatly impacted, and I suspect that is why there are rumors of an extra import spot in the future.

CHL's talent level will be fine because it is going to get more young talent in the form of guys who in the past would've avoided CHL to maintain their NCAA eligibility. But those guys will bolt when D1 comes calling, at whatever age that is. The idea that they'll stick around in CHL because they'll make friends... they make friends in Chilliwack, in Fargo, etc., but they still leave as soon as the D1 school says "You're ready." The good news for CHL is that in most cases that won't happen until the player is 20, but there will be a fair number who will leave earlier.

The point of my previous post wasn't that CHL will suffer an overall talent loss-- I don't think that's going to happen-- but that it's going to have to deal with the fact that a fair chunk of its players will have NCAA commitments, and that there will be plenty of active player recruitment by NCAA programs during the CHL season. There is going to be NCAA influence upon the CHL that didn't exist previously.

 

[Hockeyville USA]

Misa and Martone (who I was talking about) are very likely to be in the NHL next year. Especially Martone, given his older age and size/physical development/quality all-around game. I'd suspect he's probably closer to 75% to be in the NHL in October. To me it would be nuts for these guys to go to the NCAA if an NHL team is offering them an ELC and telling them they have a good chance of being in the NHL.

For guys who aren't top-5 picks ... yeah, they likely won't be in the NHL next year. But there's still a pretty huge pull in going to NHL camps, working with your NHL club, and getting your ELC signed and your signing bonus in your pocket. And I suspect that in most cases both the player's NHL club and agent will be pushing them to get their ELC signed and get going on their pro career even if it means more time in the CHL. Some guys will move, but again : I don't think it will be anywhere even close to as many as some here seem to think.

And there's this weird thing where people here seem to be acting like the NCAA is some obviously statistically superior development path ... and it just isn't. There's no real difference in terms of odds of making the NHL relative to draft position whether you play CHL or NCAA or Europe. For some guys maybe fewer games against a bit higher competition is better. For others slow-cooking in the CHL and dominating in huge minutes might be better. Some guys will be in good CHL systems, some will be in bad. Some guys might make good decisions to go to good NCAA programs, some might end up going to places that are a mess. But in the end ... it's all much the same thing, and talent will win out.

The other thing that's probably going to happen soon is a new CHL/NHL agreement where elite guys can go to the AHL and this will basically cut off at the knees these sorts of NCAA transfers for elite players in very short order.

NCAA route defensemen and goalies have been doing much better than CHL route defensemen and goalies lately. NCAA route forwards are making up ground on CHL route forwards. This is not opinion, this is simply how it has been. Very few had Jake Sanderson ahead of Jamie Drysdale on their draft board in 2020. Now, Sanderson is far far better than Drysdale, Sanderson developed very well at North Dakota. The Luke Hughes versus Brandt Clarke example is another good one.

 

[MS]

NCAA route defensemen and goalies have been doing much better than CHL route defensemen and goalies lately. NCAA route forwards are making up ground on CHL route forwards. This is not opinion, this is simply how it has been. Very few had Jake Sanderson ahead of Jamie Drysdale on their draft board in 2020. Now, Sanderson is far far better than Drysdale, Sanderson developed very well at North Dakota. The Luke Hughes versus Brandt Clarke example is another good one.

You're just cherry-picking examples with bias. Thomas Harley also turned out far better than Cam York. Dylan Cozens better than Alex Turcotte. This is easy to do.

Sanderson turned out better than Drysdale because he has NHL size and skating ability and Drysdale was drafted during a period where scouts were over-rating tiny defenders. He wouldn't go top-15 in the same group of players today. It's also a weird example to give because Sanderson played in a worse league than Drysdale every year from age 16-20, which goes totally against the notion that 'better competition makes players turn out better'.

From that Hughes-Clarke draft (and there's still a lot of runway for both, and Hughes was also taken much higher than Clarke) the 2nd tier of CHL defenders (Mailloux, Evans, Allen, Zellweger) looks better than Ceulemans and Buium and in general that draft looks much stronger for CHL D than for NCAA D.

 

[Hockeyville USA]

You're just cherry-picking examples with bias. Thomas Harley also turned out far better than Cam York. Dylan Cozens better than Alex Turcotte. This is easy to do.

Sanderson turned out better than Drysdale because he has NHL size and skating ability and Drysdale was drafted during a period where scouts were over-rating tiny defenders. He wouldn't go top-15 in the same group of players today. It's also a weird example to give because Sanderson played in a worse league than Drysdale every year from age 16-20, which goes totally against the notion that 'better competition makes players turn out better'.

From that Hughes-Clarke draft (and there's still a lot of runway for both, and Hughes was also taken much higher than Clarke) the 2nd tier of CHL defenders (Mailloux, Evans, Allen, Zellweger) looks better than Ceulemans and Buium and in general that draft looks much stronger for CHL D than for NCAA D.

You're leaving out Lambos & Chayka because why? Morrow looks better than everyone here except for maybe Zellweger.

The general trend over the past 20 years is that the NCAA route has generally caught the CHL in terms of player development. You're just going to have to accept that major junior won't be on top of the development pyramid anymore with the exception of the select few good enough to jump from junior to pro right away at 18 years old. The rule changes make it such that the CHL will gain more talent in the younger age cohort from 16-18 year olds but likely lose talent a bit earlier with a lot of guys leaving for the NCAA at 18 or 19. Michigan already has several silent commits out of the O, some high profile ones, so the CHL won't hang onto everyone despite your defensive claims.

 

[wickedwitch]

I think there's a pretty clear differential when it comes to developing D and goalies. Almost none of the very best defensemen in the league (i.e. top 5 or top 10) drafted over the past decade went through the CHL. Many went through the NCAA. So while it's not impossible to succeed going the CHL route, going the NCAA route maximizes your chances.

For forwards, it makes less of a difference.

 

[Torts]

You're leaving out Lambos & Chayka because why? Morrow looks better than everyone here except for maybe Zellweger.

The general trend over the past 20 years is that the NCAA route has generally caught the CHL in terms of player development. You're just going to have to accept that major junior won't be on top of the development pyramid anymore with the exception of the select few good enough to jump from junior to pro right away at 18 years old. The rule changes make it such that the CHL will gain more talent in the younger age cohort from 16-18 year olds but likely lose talent a bit earlier with a lot of guys leaving for the NCAA at 18 or 19. Michigan already has several silent commits out of the O, some high profile ones, so the CHL won't hang onto everyone despite your defensive claims.

This would be ideal...

 

[Herby]

I know for a fact that there have been discussions on Michigan's end, but I think silent commitments from top guys from the OHL is probably a bit premature. Michigan is still trying to get it's NIL straightened out, much like with football they don't move very quickly, but at the end of the day there will be a good amount of money available to the hockey program.

Also, the talk of the CHL ceding the top 19 year olds to the AHL is strange considering how hard the CHL has fought this for years, is this really considered a win for the CHL? So they will lose "Not good enough for the NHL but to good for the CHL" guys like Lindstrom and Clarke to the AHL instead of the NCAA, again how is that a win?

Whether it's losing top 19 year olds to the NCAA or to the AHL, it's still losing top 19 year olds.