CHL Can Now Play NCAA - Changes Everything

[MS]

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 is just such a pile of biased nonsense.

Hockey is growing in the USA because of the amount of resources etc. and the hothouse NDTP program has been great for high-end player development. None of this has anything to do with the NCAA route somehow 'being better'. Far more US-based players are being drafted high in the draft in the first place, far before they ever set a skate in an NCAA game. You're confusing correlation with causation here.

Again, if you want to throw out wild claims : prove it. Show me some sort of statistical analysis that shows that NCAA-trained players are turning out better relative to draft position over a large-scale sample size.

I've never said that the CHL will 'hang on to everyone'. There are obviously going to be guys that move (both ways - a player like Charlie Stramel probably would have bolted to the CHL in 23-24 rather than playing out his bad situation at Wisconsin).

I generally think most of your individual player analysis is pretty good but you've gone off the deep end with this stuff. You're in every bloody thread posting that every CHL player needs to go to the NCAA for their development and I walk into a bloody Riley Heidt thread and you're even throwing shade at the CHL there. You're coming across as someone who is absolutely desperate for something to happen that doesn't seem to be happening in anywhere near the extent you're hoping.

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.

Top 10 in Norris voting last year had 3 CHL players and 3 NCAA players : CLEAR DEVELOPMENTAL ADVANTAGE.

Top 25 forward scorers are 13-1 in favour of the CHL : meh, not much difference.

Your bias might be showing.

__________

As for goalies : goalies are weird, and cyclical. And it only takes 1 or 2 guys to create a 'boon' that seems substantial. 20 years ago everyone was from Quebec. 10 years ago everyone was from Finland. Right now the US is the dominant country.

And things are already shifting back by the looks of it. Past the 1998-born Swayman and Oettinger, there has been very little coming through the NCAA pipeline beyond that, and the 2 of the three best U25 goalies in the NHL this year (Wolf by a mile and Hofer) are all CHL trained. And the runaway best goalie prospect for the 2025 draft is a CHLer and the best goalie prospect this age Canada has produced since Fleury and Price.

Does this mean that NCAA goalies suddenly suck? No, of course not - it's just how it works. Things are cyclical, and all developmental paths are relatively equal when you pull back to the bigger picture over more time with larger sample sizes.

 

[WarriorofTime]

A lot of people here really struggling with “development” versus “had higher inputs and predictably higher outputs”

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

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 mean this Dylan Cozens?



You might not pay close attention, but Turcotte was having a great season. Many of their fans said he was their MVP. This was until the Kings did the same thing they’ve become known to do and stuff the team with crappy vets at midseason and that pushed him down the lineup (and now he’s unfortunately injured again).

Cozens has been loaded with opportunity and points. Unfortunately he doesn’t do a whole lot productive outside of that. And even the biggest losers in the league wanted nothing to do with him.

Maybe stop your early victory lap. Turcotte’s a lot more productive right now on an every shift basis and when he finally gets the situations to match, I’d bet on his career over Cozens.

 

[MS]

A lot of people here really struggling with “development” versus “had higher inputs and predictably higher outputs”

Well, yeah.

I haven't done a scientific study but I try to track/evaluate this stuff pretty closely to look for drafting trends and in the big picture over the last decade I don't see any significant relative advantage in terms of development relative to draft position from going CHL vs. NCAA vs. Europe.

Are there more NCAA players doing well than 20 years ago? Yes, absolutely. But this is because US Hockey has grown substantially over that timeframe and the NDTP program has been a massive success, and far more US-trained players are being taken high in the draft. And as the preferred and logical developmental destination those players are then flowing through the NCAA in higher numbers. Again : correlation vs. causation.

The whole 'THE US PRODUCES MORE HIGH END DEFENDERS!' thing is just simply people not understanding math and chance and fluctuations. Like, Germany has more elite NHL players right now (Draisaitl, Stutzle, Seider) than Slovakia or even Czechia. But does that mean that something actually statistically significant and sustainable is happening and Germany is doing a better job developing elite talent? Absolutely not - it's just a weird statistical blip that 3 of the 7 German players in the NHL happen to be really good ones. And same deal with Hughes/Makar popping up at the same time and skewing the numbers in a really small sample size of elite NHL defenders.

Like, does it really make logical sense that something in NCAA hockey 'created' 3 of the top 5 Norris finishers last year but simultaneously only 1 of the 25 NHL forward scorers? Nope. It's just statistical weirdness in small samples in the same way that some drafts are forward-heavy and some drafts are defense-heavy.

People see a 'thing' in small samples and assume it means something and get all reactionary about it but sometimes a thing is just nothing but random chance and noise.

 

[TheBeastCoast]

You mean this Dylan Cozens?



You might not pay close attention, but Turcotte was having a great season. Many of their fans said he was their MVP. This was until the Kings did the same thing they’ve become known to do and stuff the team with crappy vets at midseason and that pushed him down the lineup (and now he’s unfortunately injured again).

Cozens has been loaded with opportunity and points. Unfortunately he doesn’t do a whole lot productive outside of that. And even the biggest losers in the league wanted nothing to do with him.

Maybe stop your early victory lap. Turcotte’s a lot more productive right now on an every shift basis and when he finally gets the situations to match, I’d bet on his career over Cozens.

What does Turcotte's card look like? Genuinely curious.

 

[MS]

You mean this Dylan Cozens?



You might not pay close attention, but Turcotte was having a great season. Many of their fans said he was their MVP. This was until the Kings did the same thing they’ve become known to do and stuff the team with crappy vets at midseason and that pushed him down the lineup (and now he’s unfortunately injured again).

Cozens has been loaded with opportunity and points. Unfortunately he doesn’t do a whole lot productive outside of that. And even the biggest losers in the league wanted nothing to do with him.

Maybe stop your early victory lap. Turcotte’s a lot more productive right now on an every shift basis and when he finally gets the situations to match, I’d bet on his career over Cozens.

JFresh graphs are absolute garbage.

There isn't a single NHL GM that would take Turcotte over Cozens today at the same salary.

And in any case - we're talking about development here. Turcotte didn't develop at all between age 18 and 21 in the NCAA and has managed to get himself back on the right track in pro. Cozens scored 31 goals in the NHL at age 21 and has then regressed offensively since.

What does Turcotte's card look like? Genuinely curious.

It will probably look better because Turcotte plays softer minutes for a much better defensive team, which is how these things work and why they're totally useless.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

As for goalies : goalies are weird, and cyclical. And it only takes 1 or 2 guys to create a 'boon' that seems substantial. 20 years ago everyone was from Quebec. 10 years ago everyone was from Finland. Right now the US is the dominant country.

And things are already shifting back by the looks of it. Past the 1998-born Swayman and Oettinger, there has been very little coming through the NCAA pipeline beyond that, and the 2 of the three best U25 goalies in the NHL this year (Wolf by a mile and Hofer) are all CHL trained. And the runaway best goalie prospect for the 2025 draft is a CHLer and the best goalie prospect this age Canada has produced since Fleury and Price.

Does this mean that NCAA goalies suddenly suck? No, of course not - it's just how it works. Things are cyclical, and all developmental paths are relatively equal when you pull back to the bigger picture over more time with larger sample sizes.

Just one random list, but I think most would agree on this:

Scott Wheeler released his 20 best drafted goaltender prospects and 7 currently play or played in the NCAA (Fowler, Levi, Augustine, Hrabal, Slukynsky, Dobes, Yegorov). CHL only have/had 4 (Cossa, George, Merilainen, Gardner).

 

[Hockeyville USA]

Well, yeah.

I haven't done a scientific study but I try to track/evaluate this stuff pretty closely to look for drafting trends and in the big picture over the last decade I don't see any significant relative advantage in terms of development relative to draft position from going CHL vs. NCAA vs. Europe.

Are there more NCAA players doing well than 20 years ago? Yes, absolutely. But this is because US Hockey has grown substantially over that timeframe and the NDTP program has been a massive success, and far more US-trained players are being taken high in the draft. And as the preferred and logical developmental destination those players are then flowing through the NCAA in higher numbers. Again : correlation vs. causation.

The whole 'THE US PRODUCES MORE HIGH END DEFENDERS!' thing is just simply people not understanding math and chance and fluctuations. Like, Germany has more elite NHL players right now (Draisaitl, Stutzle, Seider) than Slovakia or even Czechia. But does that mean that something actually statistically significant and sustainable is happening and Germany is doing a better job developing elite talent? Absolutely not - it's just a weird statistical blip that 3 of the 7 German players in the NHL happen to be really good ones. And same deal with Hughes/Makar popping up at the same time and skewing the numbers in a really small sample size of elite NHL defenders.

Like, does it really make logical sense that something in NCAA hockey 'created' 3 of the top 5 Norris finishers last year but simultaneously only 1 of the 25 NHL forward scorers? Nope. It's just statistical weirdness in small samples in the same way that some drafts are forward-heavy and some drafts are defense-heavy.

People see a 'thing' in small samples and assume it means something and get all reactionary about it but sometimes a thing is just nothing but random chance and noise.

The most logical theory would be that NCAA Hockey is more structured and generally forces teams/players to defend in a genuine structure, which benefits defensemen. Major junior hockey in the CHL allows for more free flowing wide open hockey that leads to more scoring, which is important for high end forwards development

 

[MTU34]

Been waiting for this to be public for a little bit. Really over the moon with this for Tech

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

What does Turcotte's card look like? Genuinely curious.

Don't pay for it. I'd be curious too, but I'd be shocked if it doesn't look pretty good looking at the analytics that you can get for free.

 

[MS]

The most logical theory would be that NCAA Hockey is more structured and generally forces teams/players to defend in a genuine structure, which benefits defensemen. Major junior hockey in the CHL allows for more free flowing wide open hockey that leads to more scoring, which is important for high end forwards development

Except that the defenders cited as the evidence that NCAA defender development is superior (Hughes, Makar, Hutson) are the furthest thing from 'structured players' and are spectacular individual talents and high-risk/high-reward players.

There *may* be an argument that hothousing all the most elite talents in the NDTP together aged 16-18 elevates everyone's skill level and that that might apply to Hutson and Hughes ... but this is something pre-NCAA.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Well, yeah.

I haven't done a scientific study but I try to track/evaluate this stuff pretty closely to look for drafting trends and in the big picture over the last decade I don't see any significant relative advantage in terms of development relative to draft position from going CHL vs. NCAA vs. Europe.

Are there more NCAA players doing well than 20 years ago? Yes, absolutely. But this is because US Hockey has grown substantially over that timeframe and the NDTP program has been a massive success, and far more US-trained players are being taken high in the draft. And as the preferred and logical developmental destination those players are then flowing through the NCAA in higher numbers. Again : correlation vs. causation.

The whole 'THE US PRODUCES MORE HIGH END DEFENDERS!' thing is just simply people not understanding math and chance and fluctuations. Like, Germany has more elite NHL players right now (Draisaitl, Stutzle, Seider) than Slovakia or even Czechia. But does that mean that something actually statistically significant and sustainable is happening and Germany is doing a better job developing elite talent? Absolutely not - it's just a weird statistical blip that 3 of the 7 German players in the NHL happen to be really good ones. And same deal with Hughes/Makar popping up at the same time and skewing the numbers in a really small sample size of elite NHL defenders.

Like, does it really make logical sense that something in NCAA hockey 'created' 3 of the top 5 Norris finishers last year but simultaneously only 1 of the 25 NHL forward scorers? Nope. It's just statistical weirdness in small samples in the same way that some drafts are forward-heavy and some drafts are defense-heavy.

People see a 'thing' in small samples and assume it means something and get all reactionary about it but sometimes a thing is just nothing but random chance and noise.

What I'm getting at though is if you were to be like

"ok, looking CHL vs. NCAA, the following top prospects (picked 1st, 2nd or 3rd) will go CHL:

Crosby, Ryan, J. Staal, Kane, Stamkos, Doughty, Bogosian, Tavares, Duchene, Hall, Seguin, Gudbranson, Nugent-Hopkins, Landeskog, Huberdeau, Yakupov, Murray, Galchenyuk, MacKinnon, Drouin, Ekblad, Reinhart, Draisaitl, McDavid, Strome, Dubois, Hischier, Patrick, Svechnikov, Dach, Lafreniere, Byfield, McTavish, Bedard, Sennecke

the following top prospects (picked 1st, 2nd or 3rd) will go NCAA:

J. Johnson, E. Johnson, Toews, Van Riemsdyk, Turris, Eichel, Power, Beniers, Cooley, Fantilli, Celebrini, Levshunov"

of course I'd expect a lot better results out of the CHL group, look how many more of the very prospects there are that went that route. Between 2008-2020, only one 1 top three pick at all went the NCAA route at all, yet there are a number of former NCAA players from that draft thriving in the NHL right now. That's like anyone that's age 22-35 right now. By that token, you should be scratching and clawing to find all star players that are former NCAA guys. A big reason you see a different trend post 2021 (3 top 3 picks out of CHL leagues and 6 from NCAA leagues) with obviously variance at play as well (this year will have Schaefer and Misa likely go 1-2 out of OHL)

 

[Hockeyville USA]

Except that the defenders cited as the evidence that NCAA defender development is superior (Hughes, Makar, Hutson) are the furthest thing from 'structured players' and are spectacular individual talents and high-risk/high-reward players.

There *may* be an argument that hothousing all the most elite talents in the NDTP together aged 16-18 elevates everyone's skill level and that that might apply to Hutson and Hughes ... but this is something pre-NCAA.

They face better defensive structures in the NCAA that preps them better for the NHL whereas defensive structure across most of the CHL is pretty weak to non existent.

Back to the original point, the rules change means that the CHL will not be atop the development pyramid structure anymore, the NCAA will. And I didn't say it first, Jeff Marek did, one of the biggest CHL supporters out there. Like I said, the CHL has the potential to absolutely crush the USHL in terms of junior age talent accumulation, but they will lose high end talent a year or two earlier than usual, and it would be to the NCAA in this case.

 

[Hockeyville USA]

What I'm getting at though is if you were to be like

"ok, looking CHL vs. NCAA, the following top prospects (picked 1st, 2nd or 3rd) will go CHL:

Crosby, Ryan, J. Staal, Kane, Stamkos, Doughty, Tavares, Duchene, Hall, Seguin, Gudbranson, Nugent-Hopkins, Landeskog, Huberdeau, Yakupov, Murray, Galchenyuk, MacKinnon, Drouin, Ekblad, Reinhart, Draisaitl, McDavid, Strome, Dubois, Hischier, Patrick, Svechnikov, Dach, Lafreniere, Byfield, McTavish, Bedard, Sennecke

the following top prospects (picked 1st, 2nd or 3rd) will go NCAA:

J. Johnson, E. Johnson, Toews, Van Riemsdyk, Turris, Bogosian, Eichel, Power, Beniers, Cooley, Fantilli, Celebrini, Levshunov"

of course I'd expect a lot better results out of the CHL group, look how many more of the very prospects there are that went that route. Between 2009-2020, only one 1 top three pick at all went the NCAA route at all, yet there are a number of former NCAA players from that draft thriving in the NHL right now. That's like anyone that's age 22-34 right now. By that token, you should be scratching and clawing to find all star players that are former NCAA guys. A big reason you see a different trend post 2021 (3 top 3 picks out of CHL leagues and 6 from NCAA leagues) with obviously variance at play as well (this year will have Schaefer and Misa likely go 1-2 out of OHL)

Bogosian was drafted out of the O, thus CHL major junior

 

[WarriorofTime]

Bogosian was drafted out of the O, thus CHL major junior

Whoops, thanks! Will correct. That means that between 2008-2020, only 1 top three pick went the NCAA route, this would cover players aged 22-35

 

[Herby]

You mean this Dylan Cozens?



You might not pay close attention, but Turcotte was having a great season. Many of their fans said he was their MVP. This was until the Kings did the same thing they’ve become known to do and stuff the team with crappy vets at midseason and that pushed him down the lineup (and now he’s unfortunately injured again).

Cozens has been loaded with opportunity and points. Unfortunately he doesn’t do a whole lot productive outside of that. And even the biggest losers in the league wanted nothing to do with him.

Maybe stop your early victory lap. Turcotte’s a lot more productive right now on an every shift basis and when he finally gets the situations to match, I’d bet on his career over Cozens.

He spent the majority of the season playing with those two bums Adrian Kempe and Anze Kopitar, what a horrible situation! Maybe the Kings can acquire MacKinnon and Kucherov so that he can finally be put into a situation that fits his "best player in the 2019 draft" talent.

And yes, generally when a player is put into a scoring line role and has 0 goals and 2 assists in the proceeding 21 games, they are going to be moved down the lineup. I am as critical of the Kings as anybody, but they gift wrapped him a scoring line role with great players (which people like you said was all he needed) and he fell flat on his face offensively. Look at what Kopitar and Kempe have done with a dumpster dive player the Kings acquired for a 3rd round pick, it's been night and day, and it's been clear as day the reason why that line suddenly started producing.

He is in a great spot now (or when he returns) on the 4th line, because that is where a player who excels at many things but can't shoot a puck into the Pacific is going to excel. Nobody on Earth is taking him over Cozens, well maybe other than the person who also took him over Jack Hughes, Matt Boldy and Cole Caufield.

As far as this debate, Turcotte is also a prime example of why the age 19 season in the NCAA is so valuable, and also why putting players in the AHL at 19 might not be as great as many here think it will be, if indeed the NHL/CHL agreement is amended to allow that.

 

[Corso]

This was one player who many NCAA programs were after and had a "soft" commit to one program in the Big10 (can we guess which one?)

As I said, there will be some good CHL players with junior eligibility left going to certain colleges but the majority of them will do what Villeneuve did and sign their ELCs.

 

[MS]

What I'm getting at though is if you were to be like

"ok, looking CHL vs. NCAA, the following top prospects (picked 1st, 2nd or 3rd) will go CHL:

Crosby, Ryan, J. Staal, Kane, Stamkos, Doughty, Bogosian, Tavares, Duchene, Hall, Seguin, Gudbranson, Nugent-Hopkins, Landeskog, Huberdeau, Yakupov, Murray, Galchenyuk, MacKinnon, Drouin, Ekblad, Reinhart, Draisaitl, McDavid, Strome, Dubois, Hischier, Patrick, Svechnikov, Dach, Lafreniere, Byfield, McTavish, Bedard, Sennecke

the following top prospects (picked 1st, 2nd or 3rd) will go NCAA:

J. Johnson, E. Johnson, Toews, Van Riemsdyk, Turris, Eichel, Power, Beniers, Cooley, Fantilli, Celebrini, Levshunov"

of course I'd expect a lot better results out of the CHL group, look how many more of the very prospects there are that went that route. Between 2008-2020, only one 1 top three pick at all went the NCAA route at all, yet there are a number of former NCAA players from that draft thriving in the NHL right now. That's like anyone that's age 22-35 right now. By that token, you should be scratching and clawing to find all star players that are former NCAA guys. A big reason you see a different trend post 2021 (3 top 3 picks out of CHL leagues and 6 from NCAA leagues) with obviously variance at play as well (this year will have Schaefer and Misa likely go 1-2 out of OHL)

I mean, that is what you see?

Last season out of the top 25 forward scorers 14 were from the CHL, 11 were from Europe, and 0 were from the NCAA (I initially said 13-1 but I counted JT Miller as an NCAA guy).

And to be clear, I'm not somehow saying that this means the CHL is vastly superior at developing elite skill forwards. When you combine forwards and D ... the results are pretty much exactly what you'd expect relative to overall draft positions. There isn't some sort of 'better pathway' here, either way, The split between F and D is just basically random chance.

 

[MS]

This was one player who many NCAA programs were after and had a "soft" commit to one program in the Big10 (can we guess which one?)

As I said, there will be some good CHL players with junior eligibility left going to certain colleges but the majority of them will do what Villeneuve did and sign their ELCs.

Yup. A lot of guys will be using soft commits as contract/icetime leverage with their NHL teams and this is a fallback, not a priority. Exactly what I was saying yesterday.

Another thing I'm expecting we'll see happen is that non-elite members of the WJC team will basically be getting selected entirely from the CHL, given the relationship between the CHL and Hockey Canada. And that's a big carrot, and basically exactly what US Hockey does with their jr. national teams.

 

[WarriorofTime]

I think we can all agree based on the Nathan Villeneuve sweepstakes that this concludes that the NCAA won’t get any good players and had James Hagens been able to retain ncaa eligibility he’d be in the CHL this year and next year because he’d make friends.

 

[WarriorofTime]

I mean, that is what you see?

Last season out of the top 25 forward scorers 14 were from the CHL, 11 were from Europe, and 0 were from the NCAA (I initially said 13-1 but I counted JT Miller as an NCAA guy).

And to be clear, I'm not somehow saying that this means the CHL is vastly superior at developing elite skill forwards. When you combine forwards and D ... the results are pretty much exactly what you'd expect relative to overall draft positions. There isn't some sort of 'better pathway' here, either way, The split between F and D is just basically random chance.

Not sure what you’re looking at. Eichel, Connor, Makar are all top 8 in scoring.

 

[MS]

Not sure what you’re looking at. Eichel, Connor, Makar are all top 8 in scoring.

23-24.

24-25 it's 15 CHL, 6 Euro, 4 NCAA amongst the top 25 forwards.

 

[Hockeyville USA]

I think we can all agree based on the Nathan Villeneuve sweepstakes that this concludes that the NCAA won’t get any good players and had James Hagens been able to retain ncaa eligibility he’d be in the CHL this year and next year because he’d make friends.

There's a projected top 20 pick in the 2025 Draft who is a Michigan silent commit. The NCAA will certainly get theirs as you've alluded to. Several high end CHLers will certainly sign as @MS has stated, but many will go to the NCAA for a year or two before turning pro.

 

[4thline]

Leafs prospect Sam McCue could be a good fit to a mid-tier (not undrafted or released OA, but not a truly high profile guy, just a legitimate NHL prospect developing well) transfer. Late birthday 7th rounder that had a big U20 goal scoring wise, but the Leaf could quite easily prefer to see him come into the A a little more developed (providing he wouldn't reenter the draft for 2026)

 

[WarriorofTime]

23-24.

24-25 it's 15 CHL, 6 Euro, 4 NCAA amongst the top 25 forwards.

So a 4:15 ratio in top 25 fwd in scoring compared to a 1:22 former top 3 pick aged 22-35 ratio? What does that really tell us from a "development" statement at the end of the day?