Chloe Primarano becomes the first female to be selected in the WHL Bantam Draft

[beowulf]

Well there's a slight 30 pound difference for starters...

Well let's see, the vast majority of NHL players go their whole careers these days never dropping the gloves so don't see how that matters. And not sure where you get 30 it's not really that much as she is listed around 135 to 138 and he is listed at 159. She is also 15 and he is 18.

 

[kabidjan18]

Why tf was this thread bumped when it was rightfully dormant for weeks...

 

[Figgy44]

I'm pretty sure there isn't a single sport in the world where a 15 year old boy wouldn't dominate the womens competiton. Once boys hit puberty it's over.

Anyone who reaches the top of their craft has my utmost respect as I know how much sacrifice and will power that takes. Most people can't even fathom how much work these people put in. Men and women.

I dislike the modern trend where facts are just thrown out the window and in order to respect female athletes you have to compare them to male counterparts for some reason. I believe the only way to truly grow womens team sports is to accept them as completely different entities.

If Ms. Primarano goes on to prove me completely wrong and becomes a useful WHL player I'll be nothing but amazed and happy for her. I'm sure she will have a great career eitherway.

You honestly think that a 15 year old boy would dominate the top ranked women in the world for things like tennis, marathons, diving, gymnastics, curling, biathlon etc.? I find that really hard to believe as a rule of thumb. It was already mentioned that the cream of the crop males often have around a 10-15% performance gap vs the cream of the crop females in many Olympic sports. Plus in a team sport, other males can help shelter the female no differently than they would shelter and support a male team mate with similar shortcomings.

The crux of my argument has always been that I believe it's more than biological differences that keep women from competing from AAA hockey and above. The absolute best male vs the absolute best female, even if you shave off that 20% performance difference, there should be women who are of a calibre to hold their own against 15 year olds (ie: Haley Wickenheiser).

My comment wasn't that we'd suddenly have an influx of women that rivals and parallels the top men hockey players. My argument was that I felt it was seemingly statistically impossible that of something like the top 10,000 men hockey players over the age of 15, that many posters consider it seemingly impossible to have even a handful of women (like 5) to hold a roster spot between AHL and AAA. I'm not even saying playing in those leagues as a superstar. I'm saying holding down a decent role in a sheltered manner as some other lower calibre male players have done for decades.

I'm not illogically trying to boost women capabilities to respect them. I honestly believe that based on Olympic competition comparisons, it seems that statistically and attempting to objectively compare women's and men's performance, it should be possible to have at least a handful of women (single digits), who are the absolute cream of the crop women's phenom representation, ultimately reach a level of play that is around the AHL level. I'm not even attempting to argue 1% influx of women into those leagues here. I'm saying that statistically speaking, it must be more than biological differences that causes there to be less than .001% of women ever to have seemingly been able to play hockey at any level between AAA and AHL calibre. I'm literally saying that if things were changed and training was improved for women's hockey, we'd potentially a handful more Wickenheiser calibre women playing at a respectable calibre in lower tier men's leagues. The culture and resources is IMO a major reason why she is basically the only one who has been able and has attempted to try.

And having the two different entities, it already exists. At the highest levels, Women's hockey must wear cages. Their ability to play physical is disallowed. A man playing in that type of developmental rule restriction would be at a disadvantage. Primarano is a 13th round pick. Ignore male/female. That's a major hurdle to overcome. That signifies the odds of that individual playing meaningful games at the WHL level as a regular mainstay is low. Any individual below 5'10 is at a statistical disadvantage to compete in higher levels of hockey. But I did also mention that what she gleans in terms of how to attempt to be a mainstay or get those few games can be built upon and perhaps we might see more women challenging to be a WHL mainstay in 5-10 years. This purely based on improved support and resources to aim to help them succeed and succeed objectively if you only saw tape and stats sheets and had no idea whether the player was male/female.

This is where many are probably getting confused. NHL or bust as a measure of success isn't the argument here. I'm also not saying consistently. You just have to do it once in a convincing manner. Chloe playing a handful of games in the WHL is a success. In 5 years, a female player playing a dozen games is a success. A female player playing a full season in 10 years would be a major success. Biological differences taken into account, I do think it should be possible for a female player to be at able to play a full season in the WHL if she was a phenom and well trained/equipped to take on the challenge. Wickenheiser played a few games in the Finnish league while battling homesickness and other challenges. Another of her calibre I think might be able to hold down bottom 6 role in the WHL. Other posters are saying it's an impossibility without bothering to provide more than gut feeling opinions that the vast majority post pubescent males will forever dominate the absolute best women's hockey players that they will ever be able to offer. That's silly to me.

Yes, it was pointed out that there are men with significantly limited access to resources and level playing field training that end up at the NHL level. Yes it was pointed out that part of this likely had to do with the potential rewards for men that women's hockey would never ever be remotely able to match, so they drop out earlier than men. That was part of the comments I was making.

 

[abo9]

Not sure, it is funny how so many of these sites have different heights and weights for same player. Wikipedia has her at 5'8" also but anyone can update that.

She seems to be pretty good, in the top 4 of her team all year and praise from Richard Matvichuk, himself a former NHL dman. This article has her at 5'7"

Former NHLer praises the play of Vancouver Giants draft pick Chloe Primerano

"(Chloe Primerano) played in our top four all season long and there wasn’t one situation where I couldn’t put her out on the ice."

theprovince.com

Gotcha. They seem to have rounded the bantam draft data for height and got her weight of 138 lbs as well.

I mentioned it in a post earlier - but that's not even the smallest player selected.

As far as I'm concerned, she looks like she's been picked around players of a similar caliber... her hockey talent justified the pick. And she's a 13th round pick... obviously a long shot to the WHL like all the other players around her

 

[beowulf]

You honestly think that a 15 year old boy would dominate the top ranked women in the world for things like tennis, marathons, diving, gymnastics, curling, biathlon etc.? I find that really hard to believe as a rule of thumb. It was already mentioned that the cream of the crop males often have around a 10-15% performance gap vs the cream of the crop females in many Olympic sports. Plus in a team sport, other males can help shelter the female no differently than they would shelter and support a male team mate with similar shortcomings.

The crux of my argument has always been that I believe it's more than biological differences that keep women from competing from AAA hockey and above. The absolute best male vs the absolute best female, even if you shave off that 20% performance difference, there should be women who are of a calibre to hold their own against 15 year olds (ie: Haley Wickenheiser).

My comment wasn't that we'd suddenly have an influx of women that rivals and parallels the top men hockey players. My argument was that I felt it was seemingly statistically impossible that of something like the top 10,000 men hockey players over the age of 15, that many posters consider it seemingly impossible to have even a handful of women (like 5) to hold a roster spot between AHL and AAA. I'm not even saying playing in those leagues as a superstar. I'm saying holding down a decent role in a sheltered manner as some other lower calibre male players have done for decades.

I'm not illogically trying to boost women capabilities to respect them. I honestly believe that based on Olympic competition comparisons, it seems that statistically and attempting to objectively compare women's and men's performance, it should be possible to have at least a handful of women (single digits), who are the absolute cream of the crop women's phenom representation, ultimately reach a level of play that is around the AHL level. I'm not even attempting to argue 1% influx of women into those leagues here. I'm saying that statistically speaking, it must be more than biological differences that causes there to be less than .001% of women ever to have seemingly been able to play hockey at any level between AAA and AHL calibre. I'm literally saying that if things were changed and training was improved for women's hockey, we'd potentially a handful more Wickenheiser calibre women playing at a respectable calibre in lower tier men's leagues. The culture and resources is IMO a major reason why she is basically the only one who has been able and has attempted to try.

And having the two different entities, it already exists. At the highest levels, Women's hockey must wear cages. Their ability to play physical is disallowed. A man playing in that type of developmental rule restriction would be at a disadvantage. Primarano is a 13th round pick. Ignore male/female. That's a major hurdle to overcome. That signifies the odds of that individual playing meaningful games at the WHL level as a regular mainstay is low. Any individual below 5'10 is at a statistical disadvantage to compete in higher levels of hockey. But I did also mention that what she gleans in terms of how to attempt to be a mainstay or get those few games can be built upon and perhaps we might see more women challenging to be a WHL mainstay in 5-10 years. This purely based on improved support and resources to aim to help them succeed and succeed objectively if you only saw tape and stats sheets and had no idea whether the player was male/female.

This is where many are probably getting confused. NHL or bust as a measure of success isn't the argument here. I'm also not saying consistently. You just have to do it once in a convincing manner. Chloe playing a handful of games in the WHL is a success. In 5 years, a female player playing a dozen games is a success. A female player playing a full season in 10 years would be a major success. Biological differences taken into account, I do think it should be possible for a female player to be at able to play a full season in the WHL if she was a phenom and well trained/equipped to take on the challenge. Wickenheiser played a few games in the Finnish league while battling homesickness and other challenges. Another of her calibre I think might be able to hold down bottom 6 role in the WHL. Other posters are saying it's an impossibility without bothering to provide more than gut feeling opinions that the vast majority post pubescent males will forever dominate the absolute best women's hockey players that they will ever be able to offer. That's silly to me.

Yes, it was pointed out that there are men with significantly limited access to resources and level playing field training that end up at the NHL level. Yes it was pointed out that part of this likely had to do with the potential rewards for men that women's hockey would never ever be remotely able to match, so they drop out earlier than men. That was part of the comments I was making.

The day is coming that a woman will play in the NHL. Most likely a goalie but even a skater could happen with the right circumstances. The Q had it's 3rd female goalie ever play regular season games last year she went 1-0-1 in her 2 games. The OHL had it's first female drafted in 2021, also a goalie.

 

[rangersfansince08]

The day is coming that a woman will play in the NHL. Most likely a goalie but even a skater could happen with the right circumstances. The Q had it's 3rd female goalie ever play regular season games last year she went 1-0-1 in her 2 games. The OHL had it's first female drafted in 2021, also a goalie.

Delusional

 

[beowulf]

Delusional

misogynistic

 

[rangersfansince08]

misogynistic

oh no not the m word

 

[beowulf]

oh no not the m word

Hey when it fits, it fits buttercup. If a woman has the skill to play major junior and one day in the NHL I have no problem with it. People like you cry about it due to your insecurities which is sad.

 

[DJB]

Those boys aren't some primitive creatures

Canadian Government Freezing Hockey Canada Funding- (2018 Canada World Jr Team Alleged Sexual Assault)

Canadian Government is freezing any funds for Hockey Canada until Hockey Canada agrees to sign up with an independent agency that can investigate reports of abuse of inappropriate behavior moving forward. This stems from a woman who filed a 3.55 million dollar lawsuit against 8 CHL players...

forums.hfboards.com

 

[Figgy44]

The day is coming that a woman will play in the NHL. Most likely a goalie but even a skater could happen with the right circumstances. The Q had it's 3rd female goalie ever play regular season games last year she went 1-0-1 in her 2 games. The OHL had it's first female drafted in 2021, also a goalie.

Depends on how long that timeline is... but yeah, I guess a woman would be able to play a handful of NHL games no differently than many men have had a handful of career NHL games.

I'm not optimistic it would happen within a decade... but given a long enough time line and the opportunities to try, I could see it happen within our lifetimes.

 

[BondraTime]

The problem is that this is basically as good as it gets competition wise for her, developmentally guys are going to be blowing up compared to her same development, through no fault of her own.

Those who don’t understand this, not sure what to tell you. It’s not misogynistic, it’s just a reality of the situations.

 

[nowhereman]

Hey when it fits, it fits buttercup. If a woman has the skill to play major junior and one day in the NHL I have no problem with it. People like you cry about it due to your insecurities which is sad.

This response is pretty much par for the course these days. If you don't like facts that challenge your opinion, start calling people names and labeling them hateful bigots. "People like you..."

A female skater would have to be such a statistical anomaly of nature and would need absolutely everything to go her way, just to touch NHL ice. Even the smallest men in the league (i.e. Gaudreau, Debrincat, etc.) would be significantly stronger and faster, possess better reflexes, superior lung capacity, greater spacial recognition/hand eye coordination, a larger heart, etc. The deck would be so stacked against her, that it's not "misogynistic" to appeal to logic and assume that the chances are so slim that there's no sense in betting on it. It would be great to see it happen but I won't hold my breath.

 

[Isaac Nootin]

Most likely a goalie but even a skater could happen with the right circumstances.

Not a skater. Not now, not ever.

Goalie? I won't say never, but it's close.

In regards to the goalie recently drafted to the OHL, she wasn't even the better of the 2 goalies on the team she was drafted from. That's not misogynistic, that's just facts.

 

[99ovr]

Hey when it fits, it fits buttercup. If a woman has the skill to play major junior and one day in the NHL I have no problem with it. People like you cry about it due to your insecurities which is sad.

Yeah this actually might be possible if she takes steroids starting at 14 and has top 0.0001% natural skill and takes PEDs that improve all cognitive abilities related to sport (reaction time, decision making, etc...) then yeah you might be right.

 

[ricky0034]

gonna be lots of women in the league someday when the NHL starts allowing cybernetic body parts

people think too myopically about this stuff when throwing around words like never

 

[kabidjan18]

You honestly think that a 15 year old boy would dominate the top ranked women in the world for things like tennis, marathons, diving, gymnastics, curling, biathlon etc.? I find that really hard to believe as a rule of thumb. It was already mentioned that the cream of the crop males often have around a 10-15% performance gap vs the cream of the crop females in many Olympic sports. Plus in a team sport, other males can help shelter the female no differently than they would shelter and support a male team mate with similar shortcomings.

Honestly, it sort of is a rule of thumb. To say every sport is probably irresponsible just because there are many sports which simply have like...a couple dozen competitors. But every sport where there is a mass numbers of competitors. Basketball, Soccer, the sport being discussed right now Hockey... The best 15 year olds in the world in any given year are not built like 15 year olds that you and I were many years ago. Just for an example, a California freshman ran a wind-legal 10.45 this year. That is crazy. The women's world record set in 1988 is 10:49.

Secondly, we discussed earlier why athletics is a bad proxy for team sport results. We like athletics because they're quantifiable. But they're also unidimensional, and team sports are not. 100m just tests running fast. High jump just tests jumping high. In basketball, for example, you do a lot of running fast and jumping high, among many other things. And each of these subcategories creates room for divergence, so in a multidimensional team sport the performance gap is actually significantly more than 10 or 15%.

To tie these two discussions together in a knot, elite 15 year olds and statistical performance gaps, in 2017-18, the Canadian women's team played their second season in the AMHL (U18AAA). Jennifer Wakefield has the highest ever season and career PPGs in the AMHL for a woman respectively. Season .92 (11/12) and career .7 (21/30). The second highest would be MPP with .67 (10/15) and .61 (14/23). Jake Neighbours was 15 that year. He led the league in points with 1.73 PPG (57/33). Clearly that's significantly more than a 15% performance gap... A 15 year old Jake Neighbours, would have been the greatest female hockey player in the world at the time, if not in the history of the sport.

Here's the problem with the sheltering argument. The argument is essentially "the top women had bad teammates, if they had better teammates they would perform better." The women's team in the AMHL was not bad. Their standings points/game would have had them finishing 6th out of 19 teams. So it wasn't for the lack of good teammates that their statistics were suppressed. The majority of boys in the league were worse than the women players. It is merely that, there was an exceptional group of exceptionally talented boys who were that much better than the rest of the league. The worst female NT players were not as bad as the average AAA player. But the best female NT players were not nearly as good as the best AAA players.

Obviously, if you put Jennifer Wakefield on a line with Jake Neighbours and Ridley Greig, she would have scored more points. But that would be true of any player in the league, if you took the lowest scoring player in the league and gave them Neighbours and Greig as linemates, they would have scored significantly more than they did. That doesn't mean that player would deserve to graduate to the WHL with Neighbours and Greig. From what evidence we do have, given Canada's high ranking in the standings, there's no reason to believe that teammates were what was holding them back from achieving stats like Neighbours and Greig achieved.

And for what it's worth. Neighbours and Greig combined for 5 points in 15 games in the WHL that season. So even, despite scoring so many more points than the top women, they were not good WHL players. So there's a gap between the top NT players and these exceptional 15 year olds, and then there's another gap between these exceptional 15 year olds, and WHL roster forwards.

 

[KaraLupin]

Bolded is completely ridiculous. Should they play every players they draft then?

She was picked in the THIRTEENTH round. Some teams did not even pick starting at pick 10.

She obviously doesn't have much chance to make it even in the WHL, but so do the other players selected from round 10 onwards...

Her production is in line with those picks. Her size is not completely ridiculous either compare to some of the guys picked (there were quite a few picks of player less than 5'6 and less than 138 lbs).

If she can't make it she can't. She's a flyer as a 13th pick... like those other players picked around her, That's all

Hmm you make a good point! I'll reconsider my view on this.

 

[tsujimoto74]

Those boys aren't some primitive creatures

Well, they are teenagers...

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

The day is coming that a woman will play in the NHL. Most likely a goalie but even a skater could happen with the right circumstances. The Q had it's 3rd female goalie ever play regular season games last year she went 1-0-1 in her 2 games. The OHL had it's first female drafted in 2021, also a goalie.

Delusional

Sorry; your feelings don't negate the fact that female players have played in the CHL.

 

[Cardiac Jerks]

Sorry; your feelings don't negate the fact that female players have played in the CHL.

3 goalies have played in the q going back to Rheaume in 91-92. She played one game then bounced around the echl and some other minor pro leagues playing a handful of games with bad stats. Labonte got 28 games wth Acadia-Bathurst at the turn of the century, again with bad stats. 20 years later, Gascon got two games, again with bad stats.

Szabados played one game 20 years ago in the dub and there’s been nothing since there. I don’t believe any women have played in the ohl. Am I missing anyone?

This hardly shows progression of any sort. It’s not as if women playing against men is becoming more regular, that they are having a greater impact, reaching higher leagues etc. I know Wickenheiser made an attempt in Finland at lower levels that did not go well.

I just don’t see it or understand how anyone can think women will play in the nhl soon, even as a goalie. It would have to be this amazing, out of this world talent that has never existed to date. There are just too many physical differences and that’s simply how it is. Inclusivity is important in life but when we’re talking about pro sports everyone should be there based on merit. I totally agree that misogyny holds capable women back in the business world and that’s not ok but it isn’t the reason there aren’t more of them playing mens hockey.

 

[Elvs]

Based on what? Marie Phillipe Poulin would 100% decimate the CHL, just like Matthew Savoie is doing.

Jennifer Wakefield has played quite a lot of men's hockey in Sweden. She is a two time Canadian Olympian and 6'0" tall, yet is "only" a division 3 player (that's the fifth highest level, and usually the lowest, that you can play at in Sweden among men). Don't get me wrong, she is doing very well at this level, roughly scoring a point/game, but this level is well below the CHL.

Now, I'm no expert on Marie-Philip Poulin and maybe she is much better than Wakefield. But Matthew Savoie would surely be an SHL player, or at least a highly productive Allsvenskan player, if he lived in Sweden. You are basically saying that the 5'6" Poulin would do the same, while the 6'0" Wakefield is currently playing 3-4 levels lower.

 

[Silky Johnson]

There are so many bad take here it's hilarious. This site in general is taking Virtue Signaling to new levels.

Men and woman have different physiologies. Most sports are formulated in a way that gives advantages to traits that are more common to men. To not believe this is to not believe in evolutionary biology.

Some women also share these traits. The problem is when we get to elite levels we are talking about men that are deep in the top percentile. These traits have high standard deviation and when you overlay the graph between men and women the overlap doesn't go that far. In complicated sports you are also looking at multiple traits (like big, fast & strong). There may literally be no woman EVER who was 6'5" 300lbs, can bench 300 lbs AND can run a 5 second 40m. This is basically the average NFL lineman.

When I was a teenager I fought competitively in Judo. I was pretty good at the provincial level and a blackbelt. The women's national heavy weight champion trained at our Dojo. I could beat her 19/20 times as a 16 year old when she had 30 lbs on me. She actually trained often with youth men as we were a really good opponents for her training.

Under our current state of evolution it is incredibly unlikely for a women to be good enough to compete at the top of many sports like hockey, basketball or Football. If one did, that would likely just represent an anomaly rather then a trend.

Participation in sports is a good thing. We should protect things like Title IX that help womens sports.

Why talk about women participating in men's leagues? Why not strengthen women's leagues? If you care about women's sports, vote with your wallet and support them.

Having great women's sports leagues will do way more for our sister and daughters then pretending that something that is not going to happen is possible. Its also honest.

 

[Oddbob]

Am I the only one brave enough to say I DON'T LIKE IT? This was done for publicity, not because she is really good or comparable to her male counterparts. Tell me what guy in a physical hitting league is going to want to hit her? Men/Boys and Women/Girls have different body types and bone structures, and if she or any girl ever got hit hard by a guy, either on purpose or accident, they would very likely get hurt pretty bad. Women don't play with men in any other major pro sport, so why are hockey fans wanting hockey to be the one to break this norm? Hockey is the roughest sport other than football and rugby out there, and there is a reason men and women don't play in leagues together that have physicality.

I know, I will get labeled misogynist for this comment, but pretend that all you want, I don't care. Men aren't being excepted into the WNBA, and we here not a peep about it, nor should we, and basketball is one of the more ideal sports that men and women can play together. No women play in MLB, and there is no on purpose contact in the sport.

 

[Stealth1616]

There are so many bad take here it's hilarious. This site in general is taking Virtue Signaling to new levels.

Men and woman have different physiologies. Most sports are formulated in a way that gives advantages to traits that are more common to men. To not believe this is to not believe in evolutionary biology.

Some women also share these traits. The problem is when we get to elite levels we are talking about men that are deep in the top percentile. These traits have high standard deviation and when you overlay the graph between men and women the overlap doesn't go that far. In complicated sports you are also looking at multiple traits (like big, fast & strong). There may literally be no woman EVER who was 6'5" 300lbs, can bench 300 lbs AND can run a 5 second 40m. This is basically the average NFL lineman.

When I was a teenager I fought competitively in Judo. I was pretty good at the provincial level and a blackbelt. The women's national heavy weight champion trained at our Dojo. I could beat her 19/20 times as a 16 year old when she had 30 lbs on me. She actually trained often with youth men as we were a really good opponents for her training.

Under our current state of evolution it is incredibly unlikely for a women to be good enough to compete at the top of many sports like hockey, basketball or Football. If one did, that would likely just represent an anomaly rather then a trend.

Participation in sports is a good thing. We should protect things like Title IX that help womens sports.

Why talk about women participating in men's leagues? Why not strengthen women's leagues? If you care about women's sports, vote with your wallet and support them.

Having great women's sports leagues will do way more for our sister and daughters then pretending that something that is not going to happen is possible. Its also honest.

How dare you bring in facts and rational thinking into this thread.

You must be misogynistic